`
`571-272-7822
`Date Entered: January 30, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DSS TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-01493
`Patent 5,652,084
`____________
`
`
`
`Before, JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, JO-ANNE M. KOKOSKI, and
`KRISTINA M. KALAN Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Authorizing Petitioner to File a Motion for Joinder
`37 C.F.R. § 42.122(b)
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01493
`Patent 5,652,084
`
`
`We instituted trial in a different proceeding, IPR2014-01030, on
`
`December 31, 2014. IPR2014-01030, Paper 7 (“Dec. to Inst.”). IPR2014-01030
`
`concerns the same patent at issue here, namely, U.S. Pat. No. 5,652,084. On
`
`January 27, 2015, counsel for Petitioner Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
`
`(“Samsung”) requested that it attend an initial conference call scheduled in
`
`IPR2014-01030, and asked that we address its request for authorization to file a
`
`motion to join as a party to IPR2014-01030. We authorized Samsung to
`
`participate in the call, and indicated that we would address its request to file a
`
`motion for joinder during the call.
`
` On January 28, 2015, an initial conference call was conducted among
`
`counsel for Petitioner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.
`
`(“TSMC”) in IPR2014-01030, counsel for Patent Owner DSS Technology
`
`Management, Inc. (“Patent Owner”), counsel for Samsung, and Judges Franklin,
`
`Bonilla, Kokoski, and Kalan. The purpose of the call was to determine if the
`
`parties have any issues concerning the Scheduling Order (Paper 8) in IPR2014-
`
`01030 and to discuss any motions contemplated by the parties, including
`
`Samsung’s proposed motion for joinder in the current case.
`
`Samsung requests authorization to file a motion to join as a party to
`
`IPR2014-01030. In the event of joinder, Samsung agrees to limit its Petition to
`
`grounds upon which we instituted trial in IPR2014-01030. Dec. to Inst. 19.
`
`Samsung agrees to consolidated filings and discovery with TSMC, and to rely on
`
`the same expert as TSMC, Dr. Richard Blanchard. Samsung requests that it and
`
`TSMC conduct cross-examination of any witnesses produced by Patent Owner,
`
`and redirect of any witnesses produced by Petitioners, within the same timeframe
`
`normally allotted by the rules for one party. In addition, Samsung requests that, in
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01493
`Patent 5,652,084
`
`the event of joinder, we proceed as outlined in the Scheduling Order in IPR2014-
`
`01030 (Paper 8).
`
`During the call, neither TSMC nor Patent Owner objected to Samsung’s
`
`requests as discussed above. We authorized Samsung to file a motion for joinder,
`
`presenting the information discussed above, by Friday, January 30, 2015.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that Samsung is authorized to file a motion for joinder, as
`
`3
`
`discussed above.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`
`Christopher Marando
`Christopher.marando@weil.com
`
`Brian Ferguson
`Brian.ferguson@weil.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`Andriy Lytvyn
`andriy.lytvyn@smithhopen.com
`
`Anton Hopen
`anton.hopen@smithhopen.com
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
