`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 39
` Entered: September 29, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. QUANTUM CORPORATION, and
`ORACLE CORPORATION,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-01463 (Patent 7,943,041 B2)1
` Case IPR2014-01544 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)2, 3
`____________
`
`Before NEIL T. POWELL, KRISTINA M. KALAN, J. JOHN LEE, and
`KEVIN W. CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Entry of Protective Order
`37 C.F.R. § 42.54
`
`1 Case IPR2015-00854 has been joined with this proceeding.
`2 Case IPR2015-00852 has been joined with this proceeding.
`3 The Board is entering this Order in each proceeding. The parties are not
`authorized to use a caption identifying multiple proceedings.
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01463 (Patent 7,943,041 B2)
`IPR2014-01544 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`
`
`On May 26, 2015, Patent Owner filed motions requesting, inter alia, entry of
`
`the Board’s default protective order as set forth in Appendix B of the Office Trial
`
`Practice Guide. IPR2014-01463, Paper 17, 1; IPR2014-01544, Paper 18, 1. Patent
`
`Owner entered a copy of the proposed protective order in the records of each of
`
`these proceedings. See IPR2014-01463, Paper 18; IPR2014-01544, Paper 19.
`
`Patent Owner does not seek any changes to the Board’s default protective order.
`
`IPR2014-01463, Paper 17, 1; IPR2014-01544, Paper 18, 1. Patent Owner states
`
`that Petitioners do not oppose entry of the default protective order in these
`
`proceedings.4 Id.
`
`After considering Patent Owner’s motion, it is
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion for entry of the Board’s default
`
`protective order as set forth in Appendix B of the Office Trial Practice Guide is
`
`granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Board’s default protective order, which was
`
`submitted by Patent Owner in each of these proceedings (IPR2014-01463, Paper
`
`18; IPR2014-01544, Paper 19), is entered; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that this protective order will govern the conduct of
`
`these proceedings unless otherwise modified.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4 Petitioners oppose Patent Owner’s motions to seal that accompany the requests to
`enter the protective order. See IPR2014-01463, Paper 22; IPR2014-01544,
`Paper 23. This order does not address the motions to seal, which will be decided in
`due course.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01463 (Patent 7,943,041 B2)
`IPR2014-01544 (Patent 7,051,147 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONERS:
`
`David L. McCombs
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`Scott T. Jarratt
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`scott.jarratt.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`Clement S. Roberts
`DURIE TANGRI LLP
`croberts@durietangri.com
`
`Matthew C. Gaudet
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`MCGaudet@duanemorris.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Steven R. Sprinkle
`John L. Adair
`SPRINKLE IP LAW GROUP
`crossroadsipr@sprinklelaw.com
`
`Russell Wong
`James Hall
`BLANK ROME LLP
`CrossroadsIPR@blankrome.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
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
