`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 33
`Entered: June 10, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`ORACLE CORPORATION, NETAPP INC., and
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-01207
`Patent 7,051,147 B2
`
`
`Before HYUN J. JUNG, NEIL T. POWELL, KRISTINA M. KALAN, and
`J. JOHN LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KALAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion to Deem Response Timely Filed
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c)(3)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207
`Patent 7,051,147 B2
`On June 1, 2015, after obtaining permission from the Board, Patent
`Owner filed a motion (Paper 31, “Mot.”) to deem its Response (Paper 29)
`and all accompanying exhibits (Ex. 2029–2324) timely filed. Patent Owner
`represented to the Board on May 27, 2015, that Petitioner does not oppose
`the motion. For the reasons stated below, Patent Owner’s motion is granted.
`The deadline for Patent Owner to file the Response was midnight on
`May 26, 2015. See Paper 22. The Patent Review Processing System
`(“PRPS”) indicates that the Response and Exhibits 2029–2049 were filed on
`May 26, 2015, but that Exhibits 2053–2324 were filed on May 27, 2015.
`In support of its motion, Patent Owner provides the Declaration of
`Amber Collins, the person who handled the filing of the Response and
`related Exhibits. Mot., Ex. A. Ms. Collins explains that she encountered
`multiple difficulties with the upload speed of the PRPS system on the
`evening of May 26, 2015, and on Tuesday, May 27, 2015. Id. ¶¶ 3–9; see
`also Mot. 1–4 (discussing the technical difficulties Ms. Collins
`encountered). Patent Owner notes that it completed filing of the Response
`itself on May 26, 2015, and “served all documents, including the unfiled
`exhibits, on Petitioner via e-mail (pursuant to agreement) at 11:52 Eastern.”
`Mot. 2, citing Ex. B.
`A late action will be excused either on a showing of good cause or
`upon a Board decision that consideration on the merits would be in the
`interests of justice. 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c)(3). This rule must be construed to
`secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of every proceeding.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). Weighing the prejudice to Petitioner of the delay in
`filing a number of Patent Owner’s Exhibits against the prejudice to Patent
`Owner of not considering the late-filed Exhibits, we determine that it would
`be in the interests of justice to excuse Patent Owner’s late action.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207
`Patent 7,051,147 B2
`We note that Patent Owner began the process of uploading its
`Response and fifty-nine (59) exhibits in this proceeding at 10:30 pm Central
`time, which is 11:30 pm Eastern time, approximately one-half hour prior to
`the deadline. Mot., Ex. A, ¶ 5. Although we are mindful that filings will at
`times be made close to the deadline, the amount of time allotted here was
`less than ideal because it did not permit for any difficulties. Patent Owner is
`reminded of the duty to make a good faith effort to meet deadlines. See 37
`C.F.R. §§ 42.5(c)(3), 42.11, 42.12.
`Based on the foregoing, it is hereby
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion to deem the Response and all
`accompanying Exhibits timely filed is granted.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01207
`Patent 7,051,147 B2
`FOR PETITIONERS:
`
`Greg Gardella
`Scott McKeown
`OBLON, McCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADTM L.L.P.
`cpdocketgardella@obon.com
`cpdocketmckeown@oblon.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Steven Sprinkle
`John Adair
`SPRINKLE IP LAW GROUP
`crossroadsipr@sprinkelaw.com
`
`Russell Wong
`James Hall
`WONG, CABELLO, LUTSCH, RUTHERFORD, & BRUCCULERI, LLP
`crossroadsIPR@counselip.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
