Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750, Paper 42
`IPR2015-01751, Paper 42
`IPR2015-01752, Paper 42
`Entered: January 26, 2016
`
`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
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`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 42
`IPR2015-01751, Paper 42
`IPR2015-01752, Paper 42
`Entered: January 26, 2016
`
`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
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`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)
`
`On January 25, 2016, a conference call was held among counsel for
`
`both parties and Judges Pettigrew, Weatherly, and Chagnon. Particular
`
`issues discussed during the call are summarized below.
`
`Motions to Seal
`
`Petitioner requested clarification as to which party is responsible for
`
`filing Motions to Seal regarding the information it asserts is confidential
`
`(“Petitioner’s confidential information”). Petitioner asserts that Patent
`
`Owner, as the proponent of the evidence, is responsible for filing Motions to
`
`Seal regarding any papers and exhibits it files. Patent Owner believes that
`
`Petitioner should file the Motions to Seal, as it is Petitioner’s confidential
`
`information at issue.
`
`We instructed the parties that, going forward in these proceedings,
`
`Patent Owner shall continue to file any papers and exhibits containing
`
`Petitioner’s confidential information with a “Parties and Board Only” status
`
`in PRPS. We authorized Petitioner to file, in each proceeding, a Motion to
`
`Seal with respect to any papers and exhibits previously filed by Patent
`
`Owner. The Motion to Seal shall be filed no later than February 8, 2016,
`
`and shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages. We also authorized Patent Owner to
`
`file an Opposition to the Motion to Seal. The Opposition shall be filed no
`
`later than five (5) business days after the date on which Petitioner files its
`
`Motion, and shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages. Both the Motion and the
`
`Opposition shall be filed with a “Parties and Board Only” status in PRPS.
`
`Protective Order
`
`Petitioner also requested clarification be provided to Patent Owner
`
`regarding specifically with whom Petitioner’s confidential information may
`
`be shared under the protective order. During the call, the parties agreed that,
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`at this stage in the proceedings, Patent Owner’s counsel will not share
`
`Petitioner’s confidential information with any persons employed by its
`
`client, Applications in Internet Time, LLC, at least until decisions on
`
`institution are entered in these proceedings.
`
`Allegedly Untrue Assertions in Patent Owner’s Filings
`
`Petitioner requested permission to notify the Board of allegedly untrue
`
`and unsupported representations in Patent Owner’s papers. We informed the
`
`parties that the panel is capable of reviewing the evidence to determine if
`
`statements in both parties’ papers are supported by the record. We did not
`
`authorize additional briefing on this issue.
`
`Requested Requirement to Meet and Confer via Telephone
`
`Patent Owner requested an order requiring the parties to meet and
`
`confer via telephone prior to either party contacting the Board in these
`
`proceedings. We informed the parties we would take the request under
`
`consideration, and will address such procedures in our Scheduling Order
`
`should a trial be instituted in any of these proceedings.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner is authorized to file in each proceeding a
`
`Motion to Seal, addressing any papers and exhibits previously filed by
`
`Patent Owner, limited to fifteen (15) pages, by no later than February 8,
`
`2016;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is authorized to file in each
`
`proceeding an Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Seal, limited to fifteen
`
`(15) pages, no later than five (5) business days after the date on which
`
`Petitioner files its Motion;
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01750 (Patent 8,484,111 B2)
`IPR2015-01751, IPR2015-01752 (Patent 7,356,482 B2)
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion and Opposition shall each be
`
`filed with a “Parties and Board Only” status in PRPS; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner’s counsel will not share
`
`Petitioner’s confidential information with any persons employed by its
`
`client, Applications in Internet Time, LLC, at least until decisions on
`
`institution are entered in these proceedings.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`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
`WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`RGiunta-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`EHunt-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`RPritzker-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jonathan Pearce
`M. Kala Sarvaiya
`SoCal IP Law Group LLP
`ksarvaiya@socalip.com
`jpearce@socalip.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
