Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper No. 33
`
`Date Entered: July 6, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMERICAN MEGATRENDS, INC., MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL
`CO., LTD., MSI COMPUTER CORP., GIGA-BYTE TECHNOLGY, CO.,
`LTD., AND G.B.T., INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`KINGLITE HOLDINGS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before GLENN J. PERRY, BRIAN J. McNAMARA, and BARBARA A.
`PARVIS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PARVIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper No. 33
`
`Date Entered: July 6, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMERICAN MEGATRENDS, INC., MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL
`CO., LTD., MSI COMPUTER CORP., GIGA-BYTE TECHNOLGY, CO.,
`LTD., AND G.B.T., INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`KINGLITE HOLDINGS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before GLENN J. PERRY, BRIAN J. McNAMARA, and BARBARA A.
`PARVIS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PARVIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`
`
`A trial in each of these proceedings was instituted on November 10, 2015.
`IPR2015-01132, Paper 14; IPR2015-01141, Paper 15. A Scheduling Order entered
`on the same date set the oral hearing for August 10, 2016, if hearing is requested
`by the parties and granted by the Board. IPR2015-01132, Paper 15; IPR2015-
`01141, Paper 16. American Megatrends, Inc., Micro-Star International Co., Ltd.,
`MSI Computer Corp., Giga-Byte Technology, Co., Ltd., and G.B.T., Inc.
`(collectively, “Petitioner”) has requested oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.70. IPR2015-01132, Paper 31; IPR2015-01141, Paper 32. The request is
`GRANTED.
`A consolidated oral argument for IPR2015-01132 and IPR2015-01141 will
`be held on August 10, 2016. Each party will have 1 hour of total argument time
`for the two proceedings. Any representation made by counsel at the consolidated
`hearing is applicable to and useable in all proceedings which have underlying basis
`for the representation.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the claims at issue in this
`review are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral hearing Petitioner will proceed first to
`present its case with regard to the challenged claims on which basis we instituted
`trial. Petitioner also may present argument in support of its Motion to Exclude in
`each case. Thereafter, Kinglite Holdings LLC (“Patent Owner”) will argue its
`opposition to Petitioner’s case and Petitioner’s Motions to Exclude. Petitioner may
`use any time Petitioner reserved to rebut Patent Owner’s opposition to both
`Petitioner’s challenges to the claims and Patent Owner’s opposition to Petitioner’s
`Motions to Exclude.
`There is a strong public policy interest in making all information presented
`in these proceedings public, as the review determines the patentability of claims in
`an issued patent and thus affects the rights of the public. This policy is reflected in
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`
`part, for example, in 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. § 326(a)(1) which
`provide that the file of any inter partes review or post grant review be made
`available to the public, except that any petition or document filed with the intent
`that it be sealed shall, if accompanied by a motion to seal, be treated as sealed
`pending the outcome of the ruling on the motion. There are no motions to seal in
`the present proceeding. Accordingly, the Board exercises its discretion to make
`the oral hearing publically available via in-person attendance.
`Specifically, the hearing will commence at 2:00 PM on August 10, 2016 on
`the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`In-person attendance will be accommodated on a first come first serve basis.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the reporter’s
`transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. Any demonstrative
`exhibits must be served seven business days before the hearing and filed no later
`than the time for oral argument. 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b). Demonstrative exhibits are
`not evidence and may not introduce new evidence or arguments. Instead,
`demonstrative exhibits should cite to evidence in the record. The parties are
`directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of
`the University of Michigan, Case No. IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014)
`(Paper 65), and CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, Case No.
`IPR2013-00033 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013) (Paper 118), regarding the appropriate
`content of demonstrative exhibits. Any issue regarding demonstrative exhibits
`should be resolved at least three days prior to the hearing by way of a joint
`telephone conference call to the Board. The parties are responsible for requesting
`such a conference sufficiently in advance of the hearing to accommodate this
`requirement. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`
`will be considered waived. A hard copy of the demonstratives should be provided
`to the court reporter at the hearing.
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be directed to
`the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual equipment are to be
`made 5 days in advance of the hearing date. The request is to be sent to
`Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received timely, the equipment may
`not be available on the day of the hearing. The parties are reminded that the
`presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by
`slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to ensure the clarity and
`accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person at the
`oral hearing. However, lead or backup counsel may present the party’s argument.
`If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be attending the oral
`argument, 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.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01132 (Patent 6,523,123 B2)
`IPR2015-01141 (Patent 6,633,976 B1)
`
`PETITIONER: (via electronic transmission)
`Vivek Ganti
`vg@hkw-law.com
`
`
`Gregory Ourada
`go@khw-law.com
`
`Steven G. Hill
`sgh@hkw-law.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER: (via electronic transmission)
`Christopher Frerking
`chris@ntknet.com
`
`George C. Summerfield
`summerfield@stadheimgrear.com
`
`
`
`
`
`5
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
