`Date: October 7, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`ZTE CORPORATION and ZTE (USA) INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`E-WATCH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-00412
`Case IPR2015-013661
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`_______________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2015-01366 has been joined with IPR2015-00412. There are two
`petitioners.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00412 and IPR2015-01366
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`
`
`On October 5, 2015, a telephone conference was held. The
`
`
`
`participants were Judges Lee, Clements, and Anderson, and respective
`
`counsel for the parties. The two Petitioners were represented by separate
`
`counsel. Counsel for Patent Owner requested the conference call to discuss
`
`two issues. The first relates to its desire to file a motion for entry of the
`
`default protective order. Counsel for Patent Owner indicated that with
`
`respect to this item, Petitioners does not oppose. We suggested that the
`
`parties together file a Joint Request for Entry of the Default Protective
`
`Order, because the order benefits all parties. Counsel for Petitioners did not
`
`offer an objection.
`
`
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner explained that during a deposition of Patent
`
`Owner’s witness on September 28, 2015, counsel for Apple Inc. asked the
`
`witness numerous questions outside of the scope of the Patent Owner’s
`
`Response, and that as many as 25 pages of the deposition transcript relate to
`
`questions about the witness’s own consulting business, and the business of
`
`the wife of the witness. Patent Owner would like to have all of the
`
`testimony in that regard excluded. Counsel for Apple Inc. represented,
`
`during the conference call, that those questions are directed to potential bias
`
`on the part of Patent Owner’s witness, Dr. Jose Melendez, with respect to
`
`prior adverse dealings with Apple Inc.
`
`
`
`We urged the parties to stipulate to certain facts, to obviate the need
`
`for Petitioners to rely on any of the deposition testimony subject to dispute.
`
`We explained to Patent Owner that Petitioners are entitled to some latitude
`
`with respect to the subject of potential bias with respect to Dr. Melendez, for
`
`example, if Dr. Melendez has taken numerous positions against Apple Inc.,
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00412 and IPR2015-01366
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`in his consulting business, or if Dr. Melendez’s wife owns a patent holding
`
`
`
`company that has filed suit against Apple Inc. in the past.
`
`
`
`The parties were urged to agree to a set of stipulated facts that would
`
`obviate any actual need on the part of Petitioners to rely on the testimony at
`
`issue. If no such agreement can be reached, the parties are authorized to
`
`contact the Board again in another conference call. However, a suitable
`
`stipulation as outlined above may obviate any need for Petitioners to rely on
`
`the testimony at issue.
`
`
`
`
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that the parties are authorized to file a Joint Motion for
`
`Entry of Default Protective Order, and that a copy of the default protective
`
`order should be filed as an exhibit, upon filing of the joint motion;
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that if the parties can reach agreement on the
`
`pertinent stipulation to obviate the need of Petitioners to rely on that part of
`
`Dr. Melendez’s testimony relating to his consulting business and the
`
`business of his wife, to establish alleged bias, the parties are authorized to
`
`file the deposition transcript of Dr. Melendez, in a form not including the
`
`questions and answers directed to those topics; and
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are authorized to stipulate to a
`
`different Due Date 6 that does not extend beyond Due Date 7.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00412 and IPR2015-01366
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`
`
`Brian Buroker
`Blair Silver
`Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
`bburoker@gibsondunn.com
`bsilver@gibsondunn.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert C. Curfiss
`bob@curfiss.com
`
`David O. Simmons
`IVC Patent Agency
`dsimmons@sbcglobal.net
`
`FOR PETITIONER IN IPR2015-01366:
`
`Steve Moore
`Richard Thill
`Barry Shelton
`Brian Nash
`Pillsbury Law LLP
`steve.moore@pillsburylaw.com
`richard.thill@pillsburylaw.com
`barry.shelton@pillsburylaw.com
`brian.nash@pillsburylaw.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
