`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 31
`Entered: July 15, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`HTC CORPORATION,
`HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMES B. ARPIN, MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, and
`SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`1 The parties are not authorized to use a multiple proceeding caption. They must
`file individual papers separately in each proceeding to which they pertain.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)
`
`
`As noted in the Scheduling Order for the above-captioned proceedings, if no
`Motions to Amend are filed in these proceedings, Due Date 3 is moot, and the
`panel may advance Due Dates 4–7 sua sponte. Because no Motions to Amend
`were filed in these proceedings, we advance Due Dates 4–7, as indicated below.
`The parties may stipulate to different dates for DUE DATES 4 and 5 (earlier
`or later, but no later than DUE DATE 6). A notice of the stipulation, specifically
`identifying the changed due dates, must be filed promptly. The parties may not
`stipulate to an extension of DUE DATES 6 and 7, and, if either party anticipates
`the need to alter Due Date 7, the parties shall seek jointly to schedule a conference
`call with the panel immediately upon the identification any conflict or potential
`conflict with Due Date 7.
`In stipulating to different dates, the parties should consider the effect of the
`stipulation on due dates to object to evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)), to
`supplement evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)), to conduct cross-examination (37
`C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2)), and to draft papers depending on the evidence and cross-
`examination testimony.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)
`
`
`REVISED DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 2 ................................................................................ July 18, 20162
` Petitioner’s reply to Patent Owner’s response to the Petition
`
`DUE DATE 4 ......................................................................... August 15, 2016
`Motion for observation regarding cross-examination of reply witness
`Motion to exclude evidence
`Request for oral argument3
`
`DUE DATE 5 ......................................................................... August 29, 2016
`Response to observation
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6 ..................................................................... September 6, 2016
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 7 ................................................................... September 19, 2016
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2 Due Date 2 changed by stipulation. See, e.g., IPR2015-01501, Paper 30.
`3 The parties may not stipulate to a change in Due Date 4 with respect to requesting
`oral argument. Any request for oral argument in these proceedings must be filed
`by August 15, 2016.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Allan M. Soobert
`Naveen Modi
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`Samsung-PUMA-IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`Rajeev Gupta
`Darren M. Jiron
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`LGE_Finnegan_PUMAIPR@finnegan.com
`
`Joseph A. Micallef
`Stephen M. Everett
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`stephen.everett@sidley.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Alisa Lipski
`Masood Anjom
`AHMAD, ZAVITSANOS, ANAIPAKOS, ALAVI & MENSING P.C.
`alipski@azalaw.com
`manjom@azalaw.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
