Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 19
`Entered: October 24, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`GOOGLE INC. and
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CORE WIRELESS LICENSING S.A.R.L.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, CHRISTA P. ZADO, and
`JESSICA C. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZADO, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 19
`Entered: October 24, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`GOOGLE INC. and
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CORE WIRELESS LICENSING S.A.R.L.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, CHRISTA P. ZADO, and
`JESSICA C. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZADO, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`
`
`The Scheduling Orders set November 2, 2016, as the date for oral
`argument, if requested by the parties and granted by the Board. IPR2015-
`01714, Paper 9, 6; IPR2015-01715, Paper 9, 6. Petitioner and Patent Owner
`have requested oral argument pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a). IPR2015-
`01714, Papers 17, 18; IPR2015-01715, Papers 17, 18 . The parties’ request
`for oral argument is granted.
`A single, consolidated hearing will be held for the proceedings. Each
`party will have sixty (60) minutes to present arguments. Petitioner bears the
`ultimate burden of proof that the claims at issue in this review are
`unpatentable. See 35 U.S.C. § 316(e). At oral argument, therefore,
`Petitioner will proceed first to present its case on the grounds of patentability
`on which we instituted trial. Thereafter, Patent Owner will argue its
`opposition to Petitioner’s case. To the extent Petitioner reserves rebuttal
`time, Petitioner then may make use of its rebuttal time responding to Patent
`Owner.
`Oral argument will commence at 1:00 PM Eastern Time on
`November 2, 2016, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600
`Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. All attendees will need a valid form
`of government-issued identification in order to enter the building and may be
`subject to security screening. The hearing will be open to the public for in-
`person attendance, and in-person attendance will be accommodated on a
`first-come, first-served basis. If the parties have any concern about
`disclosing confidential information, they are to contact the Board at least ten
`(10) days before the hearing to discuss the matter. The Board will provide a
`court reporter for the hearing and the reporter’s transcript will constitute the
`official record of the oral argument.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`
`
`At least seven (7) days prior to oral argument, each party shall serve
`on the other party any demonstrative exhibit(s) it intends to use during oral
`argument. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b). The parties also shall provide the
`demonstrative exhibits to the Board at least five (5) days prior to oral
`argument by e-mailing them to Trials@uspto.gov. The parties shall not
`file any demonstrative exhibits in these cases without our prior
`authorization. Demonstrative exhibits are not evidence, but merely a visual
`aid at the oral arguments. Demonstrative exhibits may not introduce new
`evidence or raise new arguments, but instead, 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 IPR2013-
`00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65) and CBS Interactive Inc. v.
`Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, IPR2013-00033, (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013)
`(Paper 118), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits.
`The parties should attempt to resolve any objections to demonstratives
`prior to involving the Board. The parties must request a conference call with
`the Board at least two (2) days before the hearing to present any unresolved
`objection regarding the propriety of any demonstrative exhibit. Any
`unresolved objection to demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented
`will be considered waived. The Board asks the parties to confine
`demonstrative exhibit objections to those identifying egregious violations
`that are prejudicial to the administration of justice. To aid in the preparation
`of an accurate transcript, each party shall provide paper copies of its
`demonstratives to the court reporter on the day of the oral arguments. Such
`paper copies shall not become part of the record of this proceeding.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`
`
`The parties are reminded that each presenter must identify clearly and
`specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number),
`paper, or exhibit referenced during the oral arguments to ensure the clarity
`and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript. The parties also should note that at
`least one member of the panel will be attending the oral arguments
`electronically from a remote location and that if any demonstrative is not
`made fully available or visible to the judge presiding over the oral
`arguments, that demonstrative will not be considered. Because of
`limitations of the audio transmission systems in our hearing rooms, the
`presenter may speak only when standing at the hearing room lectern. If the
`parties have questions as to whether demonstrative exhibits would be
`sufficiently visible and available to all of the judges, the parties are invited
`to contact the Board at (571) 272-9797.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at oral argument. If a party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`attending the oral arguments, the parties should request a joint telephone
`conference with the Board no later than seven (7) days prior to the oral
`arguments to discuss the matter. Any counsel of record, however, may
`present the party’s arguments.
`Lead counsel and back-up counsel may use portable computers in the
`hearing room at the counsel tables and at the hearing room lectern. Requests
`for audio-visual equipment are to be made five (5) business days in advance
`of the oral argument date. The requests are to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov.
`If the requests are not received timely, the equipment may not be available
`on the day of the hearing.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01714 (7,072,667 B2)
`IPR2015-01715 (7,072,667 B2)
`
`
`ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that oral argument for this proceeding shall take place
`beginning at 1:00 PM Eastern Time on November 2, 2016, on the ninth floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Naveen Modi
`Joseph E. Palys
`Daniel Zeilberger
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`Google_LG-CoreWireless-IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Tarek N. Fahmi
`Holly J. Atkinson
`ASCENDA LAW GROUP, PC
`tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`holly.atkinson@aacendalaw.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
