Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750, Paper 106
`IPR2015-01751, Paper 108
`IPR2015-01752, Paper 106
`Entered: April 8, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`RPX CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`APPLICATIONS IN INTERNET TIME, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2015-01750
`Patent 8,484,111 B2
`
`Case IPR2015-01751
`Case IPR2015-01752
`Patent 7,356,482 B21
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, and
`JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5, 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues common to all cases; therefore, we issue a
`single order to be entered in each case.
`
`
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750, Paper 106
`IPR2015-01751, Paper 108
`IPR2015-01752, Paper 106
`Entered: April 8, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`RPX CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`APPLICATIONS IN INTERNET TIME, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2015-01750
`Patent 8,484,111 B2
`
`Case IPR2015-01751
`Case IPR2015-01752
`Patent 7,356,482 B21
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, and
`JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5, 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues common to all cases; therefore, we issue a
`single order to be entered in each case.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`The captioned proceedings have been remanded to the Board by the
`
`Federal Circuit. See Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp.,
`
`897 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The parties previously submitted a joint
`
`proposal for a briefing schedule in the remanded proceedings, including a
`
`request for an Oral Hearing. See Ex. 30032. By previous Order (Paper 93),
`
`the date for Oral Hearing was set as April 25, 2019. This Order sets forth
`
`further details regarding the Oral Hearing.
`
`Because the issues on remand are the same in each proceeding, the
`
`hearing shall be a consolidated hearing. The hearing will commence at
`
`1:00 pm Eastern Time, on Thursday, April 25, 2019, and will be
`
`conducted at the USPTO Headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia (the ninth
`
`floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia,
`
`22314). To facilitate presentation of argument and evidence relating to
`
`confidential information, the hearing will be closed to the public. Only
`
`persons authorized to access confidential information shall be permitted in
`
`the courtroom during the hearing. See Paper 50 (Order entering Board’s
`
`default Protective Order); Paper 58, 11–13 (setting forth changes to the
`
`default Protective Order), 15 (Order entering revised Protective Order);
`
`Ex. 3001 (revised Protective Order). At least one judge may participate in
`
`the hearing via videoconference from a remote location; counsel for the
`
`parties, however, must appear in person. The Board will provide a court
`
`
`2 Citations herein are to the papers and exhibits filed in IPR2015-01750.
`The same or similar papers and exhibits also have been filed in
`IPR2015-01751 and IPR2015-01752.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`reporter for the hearing, and the reporter’s transcript will constitute the
`
`official record of the hearing.3
`
`Each side will have forty-five (45) minutes to present its argument.
`
`Petitioner will proceed first, presenting its arguments related to the issues on
`
`remand in this proceeding (see Paper 84), and may reserve rebuttal time.
`
`Thereafter, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s arguments. Thereafter,
`
`Petitioner may use any time it has reserved for rebuttal to respond to Patent
`
`Owner’s arguments; Petitioner may not reserve more than half its total time
`
`allotted for rebuttal.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`
`least seven business days prior to the hearing. Demonstrative exhibits are
`
`visual aids to oral argument and not evidence, and should be clearly marked
`
`as such. For example, each slide may be marked with the words
`
`“DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE” in the footer.
`
`Demonstrative exhibits may not be used to advance arguments or introduce
`
`evidence not previously presented in the record. See Dell Inc. v. Acceleron,
`
`LLC, 884 F.3d 1364, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (noting that the “Board was
`
`obligated to dismiss [the petitioner’s] untimely argument . . . raised for the
`
`first time during oral argument”). Instead, demonstrative exhibits should
`
`cite to the briefs and evidence in the record. Demonstrative exhibits, marked
`
`
`3 The parties will have an opportunity to review the transcript for any
`confidential information, and to file a Motion to Seal if desired, prior to the
`transcript being made public. The Board will provide a deadline for such a
`Motion when the transcript is available.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`as noted above, should be filed as exhibits and in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.70(b), and no later than April 24, 2019.4
`
`The Board expects that the parties will meet and confer in good faith
`
`to resolve any objections to demonstrative exhibits. Each party also shall
`
`provide a hard copy of its demonstrative exhibits to the court reporter at the
`
`hearing. There is no need to provide a hard copy of the demonstrative
`
`exhibits for the panel. 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), for
`
`guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits.
`
`For any objections to demonstrative exhibits that cannot be resolved
`
`after conferring with the opposing party, the parties may file jointly a
`
`one-page list of objections, no later than April 23, 2019. The list should
`
`identify with particularity which demonstrative exhibits are subject to
`
`objection and include a short statement (no more than one sentence) of the
`
`reason for each objection. No argument or further explanation is permitted.
`
`We will reserve ruling on the objections until the hearing, or after the
`
`hearing. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits that is not presented
`
`timely will be considered waived. As demonstrative exhibits are not
`
`themselves evidence, the Board asks the parties to confine demonstrative
`
`
`4 The parties are reminded of our instructions regarding the filing of
`confidential information (see, e.g., Paper 58, 13). If any confidential
`information is included in demonstrative exhibits, they should be filed using
`the appropriate availability indicator in PTAB End-to-End (e.g., “Board and
`Parties Only”). A single Motion to Seal may be filed addressing the hearing
`transcript, as well as the demonstrative exhibits, if necessary.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`exhibit objections to those identifying egregious violations that are
`
`prejudicial to the administration of justice.
`
`The parties are reminded that each 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 parties should note that at least one member of the
`
`panel will be attending the hearing electronically from a remote location; a
`
`judge appearing remotely will not be able to view the screen in the hearing
`
`room and will not be able to hear the parties unless they speak into the
`
`microphone at the podium. 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 the hearings, although any backup counsel may make the actual
`
`presentation, in whole or in part. If either party anticipates that its lead
`
`counsel will not be attending the oral arguments, that party should contact
`
`the Board by e-mail at Trials@uspto.gov no later than two days prior to the
`
`hearing to initiate a joint telephone conference with the other party and the
`
`Board to discuss the matter.
`
`The parties are reminded to direct their requests for audio-visual
`
`equipment to Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be
`
`honored unless presented in a separate communication directed to the above
`
`email address not less than five days before the hearing. If the request is not
`
`received timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the
`
`hearing.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that oral argument for these proceedings shall take place,
`
`as set forth above, beginning at 1:00 pm Eastern Time on April 25, 2019, on
`
`the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Richard F. Giunta
`Elisabeth H. Hunt
`Randy J. Pritzker
`Michael N. Rader
`WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`RGiunta-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`EHunt-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`RPritzker-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`MRader-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Steven C. Sereboff
`Jonathan Pearce
`SOCAL IP LAW GROUP LLP
`ssereboff@socalip.com
`jpearce@socalip.com
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
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
