`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 31
`Entered: February 9, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
` APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`E-WATCH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-004141
`Patent 7,643,168 B2
`____________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE and GREGG I. ANDERSON,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Case IPR2015-00611 (“’611 IPR”) has been joined with this proceeding. Samsung
`Electronics Ltd. and Samsung electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”)
`were Petitioners in the ’611 IPR, but have been terminated from this proceeding
`(Paper 24).
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00414
`Patent 7,643,168 B2
`
`
`A conference call was held on February 5, 2016. Present on the call were
`Blair Silver, counsel for Apple, Inc. (“Petitioner”), Robert Curfiss, lead counsel
`for E-Watch, Inc. (“Patent Owner”), David Simmons, backup counsel for
`Patent Owner, and Judges Lee and Anderson. Oral argument is currently set for
`February 24, 2016. Patent Owner requested the call seeking to: 1) have Mr.
`Simmons argue Patent Owner’s case; and 2) seeking to have Mr. Simmons
`attend telephonically.
`Mr. Curfiss asks to be excused from attending the oral hearing on
`February 24, 2016, because his son is having extensive cancer surgery on that
`date. Mr. Curfiss states Mr. Simmons is fully prepared to handle the argument.
`However, Mr. Simmons states he has travel restrictions for personal health
`reasons and requests that he be allowed to attend by telephone.
`In our Order granting Petitioner’s request for oral argument (“Order,”
`Paper 28) we stated:
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in
`person at the oral hearing. However, lead or backup counsel of the
`presenting party may put forward the party’s argument. If either
`party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be attending the oral
`hearing, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference with
`the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`Order, 2. The request is timely under the Order.
`Mr. Curfiss has discussed the situation with Patent Owner’s in-house
`counsel and represents that Mr. Simmons has full authority to bind Patent Owner
`at oral argument and would not need to consult with Mr. Curfiss for any matter
`that may arise at oral argument. Mr. Simmons is a registered practitioner.
`Petitioner does not object to the request. Under the circumstances, good cause
`has been shown and the request is granted.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00414
`Patent 7,643,168 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`It is hereby:
`ORDERED that backup counsel, Mr. Simmons, may argue on behalf of
`Patent Owner at the February 24, 2016, hearing;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner may present its argument by
`phoning into the assigned hearing room fifteen minutes prior to the start of the
`hearing;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner may appear and argue in person;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner will be provided a call in
`number for the hearing in due course.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00414
`Patent 7,643,168 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Samsung:
`
`Brian Buroker
`Blair Silver
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`BBuroker@gibsondunn.com
`bsilver@gibsondunn.com
`
`Apple, Inc.:
`
`Steven Park
`Naveen Modi
`Elizabeth Brann
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`stevenpark@paulhastings.com
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`elizabethbrann@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert C. Curfiss
`E-WATCH INC.
`bob@curfiss.com
`
`David O. Simmons
`IVC PATENT AGENCY
`dsimmons1@sbcglobal.net
`
`
`
`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
