`
` Entered: 9 November 2015
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`ALLSTEEL INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DIRTT ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2015-01690 (Patent 8,024,901 B2)
`IPR2015-01691(Patent 8,024,901 B2)1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, SCOTT A. DANIELS, and
`JACQUELINE T. HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues that are the same in the identified cases. We
`exercise our discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01690 (Patent 8,024,901 B2)
`IPR2015-01691 (Patent 8,024,901 B2)
`
`
`On November 6, 2015, a conference call was held between counsel for the
`
`respective parties and Judges Medley, Daniels, and Harlow. The same patent is
`
`involved in both proceedings, and also is the subject of the following ex parte
`
`reissue proceedings: 14/032,931, 14/305,819, and 14/681,874. The purpose of the
`
`conference call was for Petitioner to seek authorization to file a motion to stay the
`
`ex parte reissue proceedings. The request to file the motion was opposed by Patent
`
`Owner.
`
`The Board considered the arguments made by the Petitioner and the Patent
`
`Owner during the conference call, and determined that, based on the facts of these
`
`cases, a stay of the ex parte reissue proceedings is not warranted at this time. As
`
`noted by the panel during the conference call, the panel has not decided whether to
`
`institute an inter partes review in the instant proceedings. At such a preliminary
`
`stage, it would be premature to consider whether to stay the ex parte reissue
`
`proceedings, which would not comport with the goal of administering the
`
`proceedings in a just, speedy and inexpensive way. 37 C.F.R. § 42.1. Should the
`
`Board decide not to institute an inter partes review, any request to stay the ex parte
`
`reissue would become moot. For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner’s request to file
`
`a motion to stay the ex parte reissue is denied without prejudice for Petitioner to
`
`renew its request upon a determination to institute trial.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01690 (Patent 8,024,901 B2)
`IPR2015-01691 (Patent 8,024,901 B2)
`
`
`Order
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request to file a motion to stay the above
`
`identified reissue proceedings is denied.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Victor Jonas
`Victor.jonas.ptab@faegrebd.com
`
`Trevor Carter
`Trevor.carter@faegrebd.com
`
`Nicholas Anderson
`Nick.anderson@faegrebd.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Chad E. Nydegger
`cnydegger@wnlaw.com
`
`Michael J. Frodsham
`mfrodsham@wnlaw.com
`
`David R. Todd
`dtodd@wnlaw.com
`
`Robert L. Florence
`rflorence@wnlaw.com