In the Matter of:
`
`RPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`RPX Exhibit 1107
`
`RPX v. AIT
`
`IPR2015-01751
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`·1· · · · · UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2· · · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2015-01750
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · ·Patent 8,484,111 B2
`
`·5· · · · · ·Case IPR2015-01751, Case IPR2015-01752
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · ·Patent 7,356,482 B2
`
`·7· ·- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`·8· ·RPX CORPORATION,
`
`·9· · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`
`10· · · · · · ·v.
`
`11· ·APPLICATIONS IN INTERNET TIME, LLC,
`
`12· · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`
`13· ·- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`14· · · · · · · · · · · · VIA TELEPHONE
`
`15
`
`16· ·Before:· ·The Honorable Scott R. Boalick
`
`17· · · · · · ·The Honorable Jacqueline Wright Bonilla
`
`18· · · · · · ·The Honorable Scott C. Weidenfeller
`
`19
`
`20· ·Date:· · ·Friday, November 6, 2020
`
`21
`
`22· ·Time:· · ·10:01 a.m.
`
`23
`
`24· ·Court Reporter:· James A. Scally, RMR, CRR
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`·
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`2
`
`·1· · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS PC
`
`·4· ·600 Atlantic Avenue
`
`·5· ·Boston, Massachusetts· 02210
`
`·6· ·617-720-3500
`
`·7· ·By: Richard F. Giunta, Esq.
`
`·8· · · ·Elisabeth H. Hunt, Ph.D., Esq.
`
`·9· · · ·Counsel for the Petitioner
`
`10
`
`11· ·SOCAL IP LAW GROUP LLP
`
`12· ·310 North Westlake Boulevard
`
`13· ·Suite 120
`
`14· ·Westlake Village, California· 91362
`
`15· ·805-230-1350
`
`16· ·By: Steven C. Sereboff, Esq.
`
`17· · · ·Counsel for the Patent Owner
`
`18
`
`19· ·KING & WOOD MALLESONS
`
`20· ·50th Floor, 500 Fifth Avenue
`
`21· ·New York, New York· 10110
`
`22· ·212-319-4755
`
`23· ·By: Andrea Pacelli, Esq.
`
`24· · · ·Counsel for the Patent Owner
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 2
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`3
`
`·1· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Good morning.· This is a
`
`·2· ·conference call for IPR-2015-01750, IPR-2015-01751,
`
`·3· ·and IPR-2015-01752.
`
`·4· · · · · ·I am Vice Chief Judge Weidenfeller.· Chief
`
`·5· ·Judge Boalick and Deputy Chief Judge Bonilla are also
`
`·6· ·on the line.
`
`·7· · · · · ·Why don't we start with a roll call.· Who's
`
`·8· ·on the line for petitioner, please?
`
`·9· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Good morning, Your Honors.· This
`
`10· ·is Rich Giunta from Wolf Greenfield for the
`
`11· ·petitioner RPX, and also on the line is my colleague
`
`12· ·Elisabeth Hunt, and we have a court reporter on the
`
`13· ·line as well, Your Honor.
`
`14· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Thank you.
`
`15· · · · · ·And for patent owner?
`
`16· · · · · ·MR. SEREBOFF:· Good morning, Your Honor.
`
`17· ·This is Steve Sereboff from SoCal IP Law Group.· Also
`
`18· ·on the line with me is my colleague Andrea Pacelli
`
`19· ·from King & Wood Mallesons.
`
`20· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Okay.· Thank you.
`
`21· · · · · ·Mr. Giunta, would you please file a
`
`22· ·transcript prepared by your court reporter as an
`
`23· ·exhibit when it becomes available.
`
`24· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Yes, Your Honor, we will.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 3
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`4
`
`·1· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· And I doubt this will be
`
`·2· ·necessary, but if there's any confidential
`
`·3· ·information, you can file that under seal.
`
`·4· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Thank you.· Thank you, Your
`
`·5· ·Honor.
`
`·6· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Okay.· The purpose of
`
`·7· ·this conference call is to address patent owner's
`
`·8· ·request for authorization to file a motion to strike
`
`·9· ·portions of petitioner's reply briefs on rehearing.
`
`10· · · · · ·Why don't we start with counsel for patent
`
`11· ·owner.· Why don't you begin.
`
`12· · · · · ·MR. PACELLI:· Yes.· Good morning, Your Honor,
`
`13· ·and thanks for accommodating our request for a call
`
`14· ·today.
`
`15· · · · · ·My name is Andrea Pacelli.· I'm backup
`
`16· ·counsel for patent owner, and I will address the
`
`17· ·panel on this issue.
`
`18· · · · · ·Last Friday petitioner RPX filed a reply in
`
`19· ·support of the rehearing request.· As Your Honor
`
`20· ·knows, that's paper 136 in the 1750 case.· Patent
`
`21· ·owner AIT is requesting authorization to file a
`
`22· ·motion to strike two new arguments in this reply.
`
`23· ·First, new statutory arguments, and, second, new
`
`24· ·allegations that RPX has an interest perfected by the
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 4
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`5
`
`·1· ·due process clause.· And we can take them one at a
`
`·2· ·time.
`
`·3· · · · · ·Starting with the first argument, RPX's
`
`·4· ·rehearing request alleged a constitutional due
`
`·5· ·process violation.· That can be clearly found on
`
`·6· ·pages 1 through 3 of the request, paper 134 of the
`
`·7· ·1750 proceeding.· RPX's reply raises for the first
`
`·8· ·time new statutory, not constitutional, arguments,
`
`·9· ·based on several provisions, including 5 USC 554,
`
`10· ·556, and 706, and 35 USC 6.· These provisions can be
`
`11· ·found in the reply at pages 1 through 2 and also
`
`12· ·pages 4 through 7 and 8 through 9.
`
`13· · · · · ·For example, on page 5 of the reply, RPX is
`
`14· ·now alleging a violation of 35 USC 6(c), as in
`
`15· ·Charlie, and 5 USC 554(d), as in delta.· None of
`
`16· ·those statutes were even cited in RPX's rehearing
`
`17· ·request despite RPX's due process argument being
`
`18· ·almost three pages long, and RPX should not be
`
`19· ·allowed to raise a brand-new statutory argument for
`
`20· ·the first time in reply.
`
`21· · · · · ·Now moving on to the second argument, RPX's
`
`22· ·rehearing request alleged a due process violation,
`
`23· ·and as AIT explained in its response, there are two
`
`24· ·steps to a due process analysis.· The first step is
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 5
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`6
`
`·1· ·identifying a protected property or liberty interest,
`
`·2· ·and the second step is determining if additional
`
`·3· ·process is required to avoid a risk of erroneous
`
`·4· ·deprivation of such interest.
`
`·5· · · · · ·As the party claiming a due process
`
`·6· ·violation, RPX bears the burden of establishing both
`
`·7· ·elements, and in its response, AIT pointed out that
`
`·8· ·RPX's rehearing request failed to allege any
`
`·9· ·protected property or liberty interest.· AIT also
`
`10· ·pointed out, and that's in the footnote on page 5 of
`
`11· ·paper 135, Your Honor, in the 1750 proceeding, it
`
`12· ·would be improper for RPX to try to meet its burden
`
`13· ·for the first time in reply.· But that is exactly
`
`14· ·what RPX is doing now.· For the first time in reply,
`
`15· ·RPX explains to us how it can allegedly meet the
`
`16· ·protected interest requirement, and this new argument
`
`17· ·can be found in the reply paper 136 of the 750
`
`18· ·proceeding at page 2.
`
`19· · · · · ·And RPX here adopted a scatter file approach
`
`20· ·and pointed to three different alleged protected
`
`21· ·interests.· Now, two of these relate to the
`
`22· ·procedural protections of 5 USC 554, and the third
`
`23· ·one, that the fees paid to have the agency review the
`
`24· ·petitions are, quote/unquote, property which RPX
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 6
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`7
`
`·1· ·would be deprived.· Now, none of this was in RPX's
`
`·2· ·rehearing request.
`
`·3· · · · · ·As the party alleging a due process
`
`·4· ·violation, RPX bears the burden of establishing a
`
`·5· ·protected interest.· Having failed to allege a
`
`·6· ·protected interest in its opening brief, RPX should
`
`·7· ·not be allowed to do so for the first time in reply.
`
`·8· · · · · ·Thank you, Your Honor.· If you have any
`
`·9· ·questions, I'm happy to answer them.
`
`10· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Thank you.
`
`11· · · · · ·Why don't we hear from Mr. Giunta or Ms.
`
`12· ·Hunt, whoever is speaking on behalf of petitioner.
`
`13· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Yes.· Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`14· ·This is Rich Giunta.
`
`15· · · · · ·So both of the arguments that counsel just
`
`16· ·referred to reply directly to arguments that AIT made
`
`17· ·in its response.· I will take them in the reverse
`
`18· ·order that counsel just went through them.
`
`19· · · · · ·So -- excuse me -- with respect to the
`
`20· ·protected interest, at page 2 of AIT's response,
`
`21· ·first full sentence of the first full paragraph, AIT
`
`22· ·made two arguments.· First, AIT argued that the
`
`23· ·rehearing request did not identify a protected
`
`24· ·interest; and then, second, AIT went further and
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 7
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`8
`
`·1· ·affirmatively argued that, quote, "RPX does not have
`
`·2· ·such an interest," end quote.
`
`·3· · · · · ·RPX's reply responds at a minimum at least to
`
`·4· ·this second argument.· This is clear from page 1 of
`
`·5· ·RPX's reply, which identifies the argument that AIT
`
`·6· ·made in its response at page 2 and then replied to it
`
`·7· ·by explaining why AIT is wrong.· As noted in RPX's
`
`·8· ·reply, AIT's bold and broad assertion that RPX had no
`
`·9· ·protected interest was unsupported by citation to any
`
`10· ·authority.· So AIT's suggestion now that can make
`
`11· ·such a broad assertion, again, unsupported by any
`
`12· ·authority, and that RPX is not authorized to reply to
`
`13· ·it by citing authority that refutes AIT's argument
`
`14· ·is, frankly, extraordinary.· That is what a reply is
`
`15· ·for.
`
`16· · · · · ·Now, with respect to the statutory provisions
`
`17· ·that RPX cited, the rehearing request cited a
`
`18· ·California state case, Moles, that discussed which
`
`19· ·judges can decide a case after oral argument.· AIT
`
`20· ·tried to distinguish Moles by arguing that there are
`
`21· ·provisions of the California State Constitution that
`
`22· ·require that any judgment be determined by at least
`
`23· ·two judges that were present at the oral argument.
`
`24· ·Excuse me.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 8
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`9
`
`·1· · · · · ·In AIT's response at page 4, AIT then goes
`
`·2· ·further, and they made the broad argument that,
`
`·3· ·quote, "No equivalent statutory or regulatory
`
`·4· ·provisions are applicable to board proceedings, and
`
`·5· ·certainly not determination decisions by the board,"
`
`·6· ·end quote.
`
`·7· · · · · ·AIT's response at page 4 further argued that
`
`·8· ·under the correct standard, RPX is not entitled to a
`
`·9· ·written decision from the original panel.· So RPX's
`
`10· ·reply at page 5, which AIT seeks to strike, makes
`
`11· ·clear that it is replying to those two arguments at
`
`12· ·page 4 of AIT's response because both of those
`
`13· ·arguments are wrong.
`
`14· · · · · ·The provisions of the APA and the patent
`
`15· ·statute are cited at page 5 of RPX's reply because
`
`16· ·they directly refute AIT's assertion that the, quote,
`
`17· ·"correct standard," end quote, does not require a
`
`18· ·decision from the original panel; and they further
`
`19· ·directly refute AIT's assertion that there are no
`
`20· ·statutory provisions that prohibit the re-paneling
`
`21· ·that occurred here.
`
`22· · · · · ·So, again, AIT made bold and broad assertions
`
`23· ·in its response that were unsupported by any
`
`24· ·authority, and their suggestion today that RPX is
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 9
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`10
`
`·1· ·powerless to reply to those wrong assertions by
`
`·2· ·citing authority that refutes them is, again,
`
`·3· ·extraordinary.
`
`·4· · · · · ·So RPX's reply did not raise any new issues.
`
`·5· ·The rehearing request alleged it was improper to
`
`·6· ·re-panel these cases after oral hearing and that due
`
`·7· ·process required that these cases be decided by the
`
`·8· ·original panel.· Your Honors granted AIT response
`
`·9· ·where AIT could have cited authority that authorized
`
`10· ·the re-paneling and proved RPX wrong, but AIT cited
`
`11· ·no such authority.· Instead, they -- again, they made
`
`12· ·these broad sweeping arguments that were wrong.· It
`
`13· ·was perfectly appropriate for RPX in reply to explain
`
`14· ·why AIT's arguments were wrong.· And RPX's reply
`
`15· ·arguments all support the argument that RPX made in
`
`16· ·the rehearing request, which was that it was a
`
`17· ·violation of due process for these cases to not be
`
`18· ·decided by the original panel.· AIT's request that
`
`19· ·RPX's reply arguments be struck is baseless and
`
`20· ·should be denied.
`
`21· · · · · ·Unless Your Honors have any questions, that's
`
`22· ·all I have.
`
`23· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Any reply, Mr. Pacelli?
`
`24· · · · · ·MR. PACELLI:· Yes, just very quickly.· And
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 10
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`11
`
`·1· ·I'm going to start from the statutory versus
`
`·2· ·constitutional issue, which is the last one that
`
`·3· ·counsel mentioned.
`
`·4· · · · · ·So I think there is a little bit of confusion
`
`·5· ·between two completely different types of argument.
`
`·6· ·Obviously, constitutional due process under the Fifth
`
`·7· ·Amendment and the procedural protections of the APA
`
`·8· ·are different things.· Now, RPX's opening brief
`
`·9· ·related to constitutional due process and not to the
`
`10· ·APA.· And this was clear not only from RPX's failure
`
`11· ·to cite any provisions of the APA, but also from the
`
`12· ·very footnote from the Arthrex decision which RPX
`
`13· ·quoted in the rehearing request.· And this footnote
`
`14· ·is quoted in the rehearing request at page 1 of paper
`
`15· ·134 of the 750 proceeding, and the original can be
`
`16· ·found in the Federal Circuit decision 941 F3rd 1332,
`
`17· ·footnote 3.· And I quote -- this is what the Federal
`
`18· ·Circuit said:· Quote, "it is not clear whether this
`
`19· ·type of mid-case de-designation of an APJ could
`
`20· ·create a Due Process problem.· However, we need not
`
`21· ·decide whether the Director has such authority or
`
`22· ·whether such authority would run afoul of the
`
`23· ·Constitution."
`
`24· · · · · ·Those are the words of the Federal Circuit
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 11
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`12
`
`·1· ·that RPX relied on for arguing a due process
`
`·2· ·violation.· So it was clear from the rehearing
`
`·3· ·request that the argument was constitutional due
`
`·4· ·process, not an APA violation.· Now, to argue that
`
`·5· ·citing extensive portions of the APA to respond to a
`
`·6· ·failure to make a case of constitutional due process,
`
`·7· ·that is improper, and there is no argument that
`
`·8· ·should not be brought in reply for the first time.
`
`·9· · · · · ·With regard to the second point, which is the
`
`10· ·first point that counsel mentioned regarding the
`
`11· ·protected interest, now, counsel argues that these
`
`12· ·new allegations of protected interest responded to
`
`13· ·AIT's argument that RPX has not satisfied Supreme
`
`14· ·Court precedent, including the protected interest
`
`15· ·requirement.· But a proper response would have been
`
`16· ·to argue, for example, that RPX does not need to
`
`17· ·satisfy that requirement.· To argue for the first
`
`18· ·time that RPX meets a protected interest requirement
`
`19· ·just because AIT pointed out that RPX doesn't make
`
`20· ·even the effort to do that, is not a proper response
`
`21· ·in reply.· That is making for the first time a reply
`
`22· ·in argument in which RPX bears the burden, and that
`
`23· ·is improper.
`
`24· · · · · ·And that's all I have, Your Honor.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 12
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`13
`
`·1· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Your Honor, may I -- may I
`
`·2· ·briefly respond to that?
`
`·3· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Certainly.· Thank you.
`
`·4· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Counsel is building up a straw
`
`·5· ·man here.· They would like you to believe that what
`
`·6· ·their paper said was that RPX didn't meet its burden
`
`·7· ·on proving a due process violation, full stop, so
`
`·8· ·that AIT didn't need to say anything.· And he is
`
`·9· ·suggesting that some of these arguments were
`
`10· ·responding to that.· But if Your Honors take a look
`
`11· ·at the paper, it will be very clear that the
`
`12· ·arguments that we clearly were responding to were
`
`13· ·these statements AIT made that went far beyond saying
`
`14· ·RPX didn't prove these things.· They made bold,
`
`15· ·affirmative assertions that RPX had no protected
`
`16· ·interest.· The notion that we can't respond to that,
`
`17· ·again, just seems extraordinary to us.
`
`18· · · · · ·And they also made a bold assertion that
`
`19· ·there was no statutory restriction on re-paneling
`
`20· ·here, and they're wrong on both counts, and they
`
`21· ·don't want Your Honors to look at the law and get it
`
`22· ·right by trying to seek to strike our reply.· And we
`
`23· ·just think that it's undeniable that the things that
`
`24· ·we have cited responded to direct arguments they
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 13
`
`YVer1f
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`14
`
`·1· ·made.· If they didn't want us to be able to point out
`
`·2· ·that these things are wrong, they shouldn't have made
`
`·3· ·arguments that were wrong.
`
`·4· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Thank you.· I think we
`
`·5· ·understand the positions of both parties at this
`
`·6· ·point.
`
`·7· · · · · ·Why don't you give us just a minute or two to
`
`·8· ·confer as a panel, and we will be back in a minute or
`
`·9· ·two.· Thank you.
`
`10· · · · · ·(Recess:· 10:17 a.m. to 10:20 a.m.)
`
`11· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· Counsel, thank you very
`
`12· ·much for setting forth your positions.· The panel is
`
`13· ·inclined to deny the request to file a motion to
`
`14· ·strike, and we will issue an order in due course.
`
`15· · · · · ·Mr. Giunta, I'd like to ask:· When can we see
`
`16· ·the transcript that your court reporter is preparing?
`
`17· · · · · ·MR. GIUNTA:· Yes.· Thank you, your Honor. I
`
`18· ·guess I'll ask the court reporter.· We'll get it to
`
`19· ·you as soon as -- as soon as the court reporter gets
`
`20· ·it to us.
`
`21· · · · · ·Court reporter, can you give us an idea of
`
`22· ·when we could have the transcript?
`
`23· · · · · ·THE COURT REPORTER:· Probably tomorrow would
`
`24· ·be fine.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 14
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`15
`
`·1· · · · · ·JUDGE WEIDENFELLER:· That sounds very good.
`
`·2· ·Thank you very much.
`
`·3· · · · · ·Unless either party has anything else they
`
`·4· ·would like to add at this point, the conference call
`
`·5· ·is concluded.
`
`·6· · · · · ·(Time noted:· 10:21 a.m.)
`
`·7
`
`·8
`
`·9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 15
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`16
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · ·C E R T I F I C A T E
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · · · ·I, James A. Scally, RMR, CRR, a Certified
`
`·4· ·Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the
`
`·5· ·Commonwealth of Massachusetts, do hereby certify that
`
`·6· ·the foregoing transcript is a complete, true, and
`
`·7· ·accurate transcription of my stenographic
`
`·8· ·notes/audiographic recordings taken in the
`
`·9· ·aforementioned matter to the best of my knowledge,
`
`10· ·skill, and ability.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · · · James A. Scally, RMR, CRR
`
`14· · · · · · · · · · · · · CSR/Notary Public
`
`15· · · · · · · · · · · · · My Commission Expires:
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · · · · April 8, 2022
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`Page 16
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
` 9:1,10,22
` 10:8,9,10
` 12:19 13:8,13
`AIT's
` 7:20 8:8,10,13
` 9:1,7,12,16,19
` 10:14,18
` 12:13
`allegations
` 4:24 12:12
`allege
` 6:8 7:5
`alleged
` 5:4,22 6:20
` 10:5
`allegedly
` 6:15
`alleging
` 5:14 7:3
`allowed
` 5:19 7:7
`Amendment
` 11:7
`analysis
` 5:24
`Andrea
` 3:18 4:15
`APA
` 9:14 11:7,10,
` 11 12:4,5
`APJ
` 11:19
`applicable
` 9:4
`approach
` 6:19
`argue
` 12:4,16,17
`argued
` 7:22 8:1 9:7
`argues
` 12:11
`arguing
` 8:20 12:1
`argument
` 5:3,17,19,21
` 6:16 8:4,5,13,
` 19,23 9:2
` 10:15 11:5
` 12:3,7,13,22
`arguments
` 4:22,23 5:8
`
` 7:15,16,22
` 9:11,13 10:12,
` 14,15,19 13:9,
` 12,24 14:3
`Arthrex
` 11:12
`assertion
` 8:8,11 9:16,19
` 13:18
`assertions
` 9:22 10:1
` 13:15
`authority
` 8:10,12,13
` 9:24 10:2,9,11
` 11:21,22
`authorization
` 4:8,21
`authorized
` 8:12 10:9
`avoid
` 6:3
`
`B
`
`back
` 14:8
`backup
` 4:15
`based
` 5:9
`baseless
` 10:19
`bears
` 6:6 7:4 12:22
`begin
` 4:11
`behalf
` 7:12
`bit
` 11:4
`Boalick
` 3:5
`board
` 9:4,5
`bold
` 8:8 9:22
` 13:14,18
`Bonilla
` 3:5
`brand-new
` 5:19
`
`briefly
` 13:2
`briefs
` 4:9
`broad
` 8:8,11 9:2,22
` 10:12
`brought
` 12:8
`building
` 13:4
`burden
` 6:6,12 7:4
` 12:22 13:6
`
`C
`
`California
` 8:18,21
`call
` 3:2,7 4:7,13
`case
` 4:20 8:18,19
` 12:6
`cases
` 10:6,7,17
`Charlie
` 5:15
`Chief
` 3:4,5
`Circuit
` 11:16,18,24
`citation
` 8:9
`cite
` 11:11
`cited
` 5:16 8:17 9:15
` 10:9,10 13:24
`citing
` 8:13 10:2 12:5
`claiming
` 6:5
`clause
` 5:1
`clear
` 8:4 9:11
` 11:10,18 12:2
` 13:11
`colleague
` 3:11,18
`completely
` 11:5
`
`6
`
`6
`
`5:10
`6(c)
` 5:14
`
`7
`
`7
`
`5:12
`706
` 5:10
`750
` 6:17 11:15
`
`8
`
`8
`
`5:12
`
`9
`
`9
`
`5:12
`941
` 11:16
`
`A
`
`a.m.
` 14:10
`accommodatin
`
`g
`
`4:13
`additional
` 6:2
`address
` 4:7,16
`adopted
` 6:19
`affirmative
` 13:15
`affirmatively
` 8:1
`afoul
` 11:22
`agency
` 6:23
`AIT
` 4:21 5:23 6:7,
` 9 7:16,21,22,
` 24 8:5,7,19
`
`1
`
`1
`
`5:6,11 8:4
` 11:14
`10:17
` 14:10
`10:20
` 14:10
`1332
` 11:16
`134
` 5:6 11:15
`135
` 6:11
`136
` 4:20 6:17
`1750
` 4:20 5:7 6:11
`
`2
`
`2
`
`5:11 6:18 7:20
` 8:6
`
`3
`
`3
`
`5:6 11:17
`35
` 5:10,14
`
`4
`
`4
`
`5:12 9:1,7,12
`
`5
`
`5
`
`5:9,13,15
` 6:10,22 9:10,
` 15
`554
` 5:9 6:22
`554(d)
` 5:15
`556
` 5:10
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`·Index: 1–completely
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`confer
` 14:8
`conference
` 3:2 4:7
`confidential
` 4:2
`confusion
` 11:4
`Constitution
` 8:21 11:23
`constitutional
` 5:4,8 11:2,6,9
` 12:3,6
`correct
` 9:8,17
`counsel
` 4:10,16 7:15,
` 18 11:3 12:10,
` 11 13:4 14:11
`counts
` 13:20
`court
` 3:12,22 12:14
` 14:16,18,19,
` 21,23
`create
` 11:20
`
`D
`
`de-designation
` 11:19
`decide
` 8:19 11:21
`decided
` 10:7,18
`decision
` 9:9,18 11:12,
` 16
`decisions
` 9:5
`delta
` 5:15
`denied
` 10:20
`deny
` 14:13
`deprivation
` 6:4
`deprived
` 7:1
`Deputy
` 3:5
`
`determination
` 9:5
`determined
` 8:22
`determining
` 6:2
`direct
` 13:24
`directly
` 7:16 9:16,19
`Director
` 11:21
`discussed
` 8:18
`distinguish
` 8:20
`doubt
` 4:1
`due
` 5:1,4,17,22,24
` 6:5 7:3 10:6,
` 17 11:6,9,20
` 12:1,3,6 13:7
` 14:14
`
`E
`
`effort
` 12:20
`elements
` 6:7
`Elisabeth
` 3:12
`end
` 8:2 9:6,17
`entitled
` 9:8
`equivalent
` 9:3
`erroneous
` 6:3
`establishing
` 6:6 7:4
`excuse
` 7:19 8:24
`exhibit
` 3:23
`explain
` 10:13
`explained
` 5:23
`explaining
`
` 8:7
`explains
` 6:15
`extensive
` 12:5
`extraordinary
` 8:14 10:3
` 13:17
`
`granted
` 10:8
`Greenfield
` 3:10
`Group
` 3:17
`guess
` 14:18
`
`F
`
`H
`
`F3rd
` 11:16
`failed
` 6:8 7:5
`failure
` 11:10 12:6
`Federal
` 11:16,17,24
`fees
` 6:23
`file
` 3:21 4:3,8,21
` 6:19 14:13
`filed
` 4:18
`fine
` 14:24
`footnote
` 6:10 11:12,13,
` 17
`found
` 5:5,11 6:17
` 11:16
`frankly
` 8:14
`Friday
` 4:18
`full
` 7:21 13:7
`
`G
`
`Giunta
` 3:9,10,21,24
` 4:4 7:11,13,14
` 13:1,4 14:15,
` 17
`give
` 14:7,21
`Good
` 3:1,9,16 4:12
`
`happy
` 7:9
`hear
` 7:11
`hearing
` 10:6
`Honor
` 3:13,16,24
` 4:5,12,19 6:11
` 7:8,13 12:24
` 13:1 14:17
`Honors
` 3:9 10:8,21
` 13:10,21
`Hunt
` 3:12 7:12
`
`I
`
`idea
` 14:21
`identifies
` 8:5
`identify
` 7:23
`identifying
` 6:1
`improper
` 6:12 10:5
` 12:7,23
`inclined
` 14:13
`including
` 5:9 12:14
`information
` 4:3
`interest
` 4:24 6:1,4,9,
` 16 7:5,6,20,24
` 8:2,9 12:11,
` 12,14,18
` 13:16
`
`interests
` 6:21
`IP
` 3:17
`IPR-2015-
`01750
` 3:2
`IPR-2015-
`01751
` 3:2
`IPR-2015-
`01752
` 3:3
`issue
` 4:17 11:2
` 14:14
`issues
` 10:4
`
`J
`
`Judge
` 3:1,4,5,14,20
` 4:1,6 7:10
` 10:23 13:3
` 14:4,11
`judges
` 8:19,23
`judgment
` 8:22
`
`K
`
`King
` 3:19
`
`L
`
`law
` 3:17 13:21
`liberty
` 6:1,9
`long
` 5:18
`
`M
`
`made
` 7:16,22 8:6
` 9:2,22 10:11,
` 15 13:13,14,
` 18 14:1,2
`make
` 8:10 12:6,19
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`·Index: confer–make
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`makes
` 9:10
`making
` 12:21
`Mallesons
` 3:19
`man
` 13:5
`meet
` 6:12,15 13:6
`meets
` 12:18
`mentioned
` 11:3 12:10
`mid-case
` 11:19
`minimum
` 8:3
`minute
` 14:7,8
`Moles
` 8:18,20
`morning
` 3:1,9,16 4:12
`motion
` 4:8,22 14:13
`moving
` 5:21
`
`N
`
`noted
` 8:7
`notion
` 13:16
`
`O
`
`occurred
` 9:21
`opening
` 7:6 11:8
`oral
` 8:19,23 10:6
`order
` 7:18 14:14
`original
` 9:9,18 10:8,18
` 11:15
`owner
` 3:15 4:11,16,
` 21
`
`owner's
` 4:7
`
`P
`
`Pacelli
` 3:18 4:12,15
` 10:23,24
`pages
` 5:6,11,12,18
`paid
` 6:23
`panel
` 4:17 9:9,18
` 10:8,18 14:8,
` 12
`paper
` 4:20 5:6 6:11,
` 17 11:14 13:6,
` 11
`paragraph
` 7:21
`parties
` 14:5
`party
` 6:5 7:3
`patent
` 3:15 4:7,10,
` 16,20 9:14
`perfected
` 4:24
`perfectly
` 10:13
`petitioner
` 3:8,11 4:18
` 7:12
`petitioner's
` 4:9
`petitions
` 6:24
`point
` 12:9,10 14:1,6
`pointed
` 6:7,10,20
` 12:19
`portions
` 4:9 12:5
`positions
` 14:5,12
`powerless
` 10:1
`precedent
` 12:14
`
`prepared
` 3:22
`preparing
` 14:16
`present
` 8:23
`problem
` 11:20
`procedural
` 6:22 11:7
`proceeding
` 5:7 6:11,18
` 11:15
`proceedings
` 9:4
`process
` 5:1,5,17,22,24
` 6:3,5 7:3 10:7,
` 17 11:6,9,20
` 12:1,4,6 13:7
`prohibit
` 9:20
`proper
` 12:15,20
`property
` 6:1,9,24
`protected
` 6:1,9,16,20
` 7:5,6,20,23
` 8:9 12:11,12,
` 14,18 13:15
`protections
` 6:22 11:7
`prove
` 13:14
`proved
` 10:10
`proving
` 13:7
`provisions
` 5:9,10 8:16,21
` 9:4,14,20
` 11:11
`purpose
` 4:6
`
`Q
`
`questions
` 7:9 10:21
`quickly
` 10:24
`
`quote
` 8:1,2 9:3,6,16,
` 17 11:17,18
`quote/unquote
` 6:24
`quoted
` 11:13,14
`
`R
`
`raise
` 5:19 10:4
`raises
` 5:7
`re-panel
` 10:6
`re-paneling
` 9:20 10:10
` 13:19
`recess
` 14:10
`referred
` 7:16
`refute
` 9:16,19
`refutes
` 8:13 10:2
`regard
` 12:9
`regulatory
` 9:3
`rehearing
` 4:9,19 5:4,16,
` 22 6:8 7:2,23
` 8:17 10:5,16
` 11:13,14 12:2
`relate
` 6:21
`related
` 11:9
`relied
` 12:1
`replied
` 8:6
`reply
` 4:9,18,22 5:7,
` 11,13,20 6:13,
` 14,17 7:7,16
` 8:3,5,8,12,14
` 9:10,15 10:1,
` 4,13,14,19,23
` 12:8,21 13:22
`
`replying
` 9:11
`reporter
` 3:12,22 14:16,
` 18,19,21,23
`request
` 4:8,13,19 5:4,
` 6,17,22 6:8
` 7:2,23 8:17
` 10:5,16,18
` 11:13,14 12:3
` 14:13
`requesting
` 4:21
`require
` 8:22 9:17
`required
` 6:3 10:7
`requirement
` 6:16 12:15,17,
` 18
`respect
` 7:19 8:16
`respond
` 12:5 13:2,16
`responded
` 12:12 13:24
`responding
` 13:10,12
`responds
` 8:3
`response
` 5:23 6:7 7:17,
` 20 8:6 9:1,7,
` 12,23 10:8
` 12:15,20
`restriction
` 13:19
`reverse
` 7:17
`review
` 6:23
`Rich
` 3:10 7:14
`risk
` 6:3
`roll
` 3:7
`RPX
` 3:11 4:18,24
` 5:13,18 6:6,
` 12,14,15,19,
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`888.825.3376 - production@court-reporting.com
`
`·Index: makes–RPX
`
`

`

`
`RPX Corporation vsRPX Corporation vs
`
`Applications in Internet Time LLCApplications in Internet Time LLC
`
`Patent Teleconference HearingPatent Teleconference Hearing
`
`November 06, 2020
`
`U
`
`undeniable
` 13:23
`understand
` 14:5
`unsupported
` 8:9,11 9:23
`USC
` 5:9,10,14,15
` 6:22
`
`V
`
`versus
` 11:1
`Vice
` 3:4
`violation
` 5:5,14,22 6:6
` 7:4 10:17
` 12:2,4 13:7
`
`W
`
`Weidenfeller
` 3:1,4,14,20
` 4:1,6 7:10
` 10:23 13:3
` 14:4,11
`Wolf
` 3:10
`Wood
` 3:19
`words
` 11:24
`written
` 9:9
`wrong
` 8:7 9:13 10:1,
` 10,12,14
` 13:20 14:2,3
`
`statutory
` 4:23 5:8,19
` 8:16 9:3,20
` 11:1 13:19
`step
` 5:24 6:2
`steps
` 5:24
`Steve
` 3:17
`stop
` 13:7
`straw
` 13:4
`strike
` 4:8,22 9:10
` 13:22 14:14
`struck
` 10:19
`suggesting
` 13:9
`suggestion
` 8:10 9:24
`support
` 4:19 10:15
`Supreme
` 12:13
`sweeping
` 10:12
`
`T
`
`things
` 11:8 13:14,23
` 14:2
`time
` 5:2,8,20 6:13,
` 14 7:7 12:8,
` 18,21
`today
` 4:14 9:24
`tomorrow
` 14:23
`transcript
` 3:22 14:16,22
`type
` 11:19
`types
` 11:5
`
` 24 7:4,6 8:1,8,
` 12,17 9:8,24
` 10:10,13,15
` 11:12 12:1,13,
` 16,18,19,22
` 13:6,14,15
`RPX's
` 5:3,7,16,17,21
` 6:8 7:1 8:3,5,7
` 9:9,15 10:4,
` 14,19 11:8,10
`run
` 11:22
`
`S
`
`satisfied
` 12:13
`satisfy
` 12:17
`scatter
` 6:19
`seal
` 4:3
`seek
` 13:22
`seeks
` 9:10
`sentence
` 7:21
`Sereboff
` 3:16,17
`setting
` 14:12
`Socal
` 3:17
`speaking
`