`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 81
`
`
` Entered: April 20, 2016
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`ORACLE CORP. and NETAPP INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-01207 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`Case IPR2014-01209 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before NEIL T. POWELL, KRISTINA M. KALAN, J. JOHN LEE, and
`KEVIN W. CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Motions to Seal
`37 C.F.R. § 42.14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 The Board is entering this Order in each proceeding. The parties are not
`authorized to use a caption identifying multiple proceedings.
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`IPR2014-01209 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`
`
`On February 17, 2016, Patent Owner filed a Motion to Seal portions of
`Exhibit 1223 and a redacted version of Exhibit 1223 in each of the
`above-captioned proceedings. IPR2014-01207, Papers 79, Ex. 1223 (Redacted);
`IPR2014-01209, Papers 78, Ex. 1223 (Redacted). We previously granted Patent
`Owner’s motion for entry of the default protective order. Paper 53. Patent
`Owner’s motions to seal are unopposed and are granted.
`There is an expectation that information will be made public where the
`information is identified in a final written decision, and that confidential
`information that is subject to a protective order ordinarily would become public 45
`days after final judgment in a trial, unless a motion to expunge is granted.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.56; Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,761
`(Aug. 14, 2012). In rendering this Final Written Decision, it was not necessary to
`identify, nor discuss in detail, any confidential information. However, Patent
`Owner has filed notices of appeal in these proceedings. See IPR2014-01207, Paper
`80; IPR2014-01209, Paper 79. Thus, it remains necessary to maintain the record,
`as is, in these proceedings until resolution of the appeals.
`In view of the foregoing, the confidential documents filed in the instant
`proceedings will remain under seal, at least until the appeal process has concluded.
`The record for the instant proceeding will be preserved in its entirety, and the
`confidential documents will not be expunged or made public, pending appeal.
`Notwithstanding 37 C.F.R. § 42.56 and the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide,
`neither a motion to expunge confidential documents nor a motion to maintain these
`documents under seal is necessary or authorized at this time. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.5(b).
`As we explained in our Final Written Decisions in these cases, Petitioner
`filed a number of documents (Exhibits 1217, 1218, 1219, 1221, and 1222) under
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`IPR2014-01209 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`
`seal without filing a corresponding motion to seal those documents. Paper 77, 18.
`We advised the parties that if a motion to seal those documents was not filed
`within 20 days of our Final Written Decision, those documents would be made
`public. Id. More than twenty days have passed since we issued our Final Written
`Decision. No party has filed a motion to seal Exhibits 1217, 1218, 1219, 1221, and
`1222. Accordingly, we order that those documents be made public.
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motions to seal Exhibit 1223 are granted;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits 1217, 1218, 1219, 1221, and 1222
`shall be made public.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`IPR2014-01209 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`
`PETITIONERS:
`Greg Gardella
`Scott McKeown
`OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, LLP
`cpdocketgardella@oblon.com
`cpdocketmckeown@oblon.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Steven R. Sprinkle
`John L. Adair
`SPRINKLE IP LAW GROUP
`crossroadsipr@sprinklelaw.com
`
`Russell Wong
`James Hall
`Keith Rutherford
`BLANK ROME LLP
`CrossroadsIPR@blankrome.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
