Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 9
`Entered: March 4, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`TCL CORPORATION, TCL COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
`HOLDINGS, LTD., TCT MOBILE LIMITED, TCT MOBILE INC.,
`and TCT MOBILE (US), INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
`
`Before BENJAMIN D. M. WOOD, PATRICK R. SCANLON, and
`BARBARA A. BENOIT, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BENOIT, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 9
`Entered: March 4, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`TCL CORPORATION, TCL COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
`HOLDINGS, LTD., TCT MOBILE LIMITED, TCT MOBILE INC.,
`and TCT MOBILE (US), INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
`
`Before BENJAMIN D. M. WOOD, PATRICK R. SCANLON, and
`BARBARA A. BENOIT, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BENOIT, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
`A. DUE DATES
`This order sets due dates for the parties to take action after institution
`of the proceeding. The parties may stipulate to different dates for DUE
`DATES 1 through 5 (earlier or later, but no later than DUE DATE 6). A
`notice of the stipulation, specifically identifying the changed due dates, must
`be promptly filed. The parties may not stipulate to an extension of DUE
`DATES 6 and 7.
`In stipulating to different times, the parties should consider the effect
`of the stipulation on times to object to evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)), to
`supplement evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)), to conduct cross-
`examination (37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2)), and to draft papers depending on the
`evidence and cross-examination testimony (see section B, below).
`The parties are reminded that the Testimony Guidelines appended to
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,772
`(Aug. 14, 2012) (Appendix D), apply to this proceeding. The Board may
`impose an appropriate sanction for failure to adhere to the Testimony
`Guidelines. 37 C.F.R. § 42.12. For example, reasonable expenses and
`attorneys’ fees incurred by any party may be levied on a person who
`impedes, delays, or frustrates the fair examination of a witness.
`
`1. INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL
`The parties are directed to the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77
`Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,765–66 (Aug. 14, 2012) for guidance in preparing for
`the initial conference call, and should be prepared to discuss any proposed
`changes to this Scheduling Order, any motions the parties anticipate filing
`during the trial, the status of any settlement discussions, and preferred
`location for oral argument.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
` The parties are encouraged to promptly discuss alternative means for
`resolving their disputes regarding the subject matter of this proceeding. To
`advance the opportunities for early disposition, Petitioner is encouraged to
`notify the Board by email, before the initial conference call, that the parties
`have conferred regarding alternative dispute resolution and whether the
`parties have reached any agreements.
`
`2. DUE DATE 1
`The patent owner may file—
`a.
`A response to the petition (37 C.F.R. § 42.120), and
`b.
`A motion to amend the patent (37 C.F.R. § 42.121).
`The patent owner must file any such response or motion to amend by DUE
`DATE 1. If the patent owner elects not to file anything, the patent owner
`must arrange a conference call with the parties and the Board. The patent
`owner is cautioned that any arguments for patentability not raised in the
`response will be deemed waived.
`
`3. DUE DATE 2
`The petitioner must file any reply to the patent owner’s response and
`opposition to the motion to amend by DUE DATE 2.
`
`4. DUE DATE 3
`The patent owner must file any reply to the petitioner’s opposition to
`patent owner’s motion to amend by DUE DATE 3.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`5. DUE DATE 4
`a.
`Each party must file any motion for an observation on the
`cross-examination testimony of a reply witness (see section C, below) by
`DUE DATE 4.
`b.
`Each party must file any motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R
`§ 42.64(c)) and any request for oral argument (37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a)) by
`DUE DATE 4.
`
`6. DUE DATE 5
`a.
`Each party must file any response to an observation on cross-
`examination testimony by DUE DATE 5.
`b.
`Each party must file any opposition to a motion to exclude
`evidence by DUE DATE 5.
`
`7. DUE DATE 6
`Each party must file any reply for a motion to exclude evidence by
`DUE DATE 6.
`
`8. DUE DATE 7
`The oral argument (if requested by either party) is set for DUE
`DATE 7.
`
`B. CROSS-EXAMINATION
`Except as the parties might otherwise agree, for each due date—
`1.
`Cross-examination begins after any supplemental evidence is
`due. 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2).
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
`Cross-examination ends no later than a week before the filing
`2.
`date for any paper in which the cross-examination testimony is expected to
`be used. Id.
`
`C. MOTION FOR OBSERVATION ON CROSS-EXAMINATION
`A motion for observation on cross-examination provides the parties
`with a mechanism to draw the Board’s attention to relevant cross-
`examination testimony of a reply witness because no further substantive
`paper is permitted after the reply. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77
`Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). The observation must be a
`concise statement of the relevance of precisely identified testimony to a
`precisely identified argument or portion of an exhibit. Each observation
`should not exceed a single, short paragraph. The opposing party may
`respond to the observation. Any response must be equally concise and
`specific.
`
`D. MOTION TO AMEND
`Under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.24 and 42.121, a motion to amend, if filed in
`this proceeding, and the petitioner’s opposition to the motion to amend are
`limited to twenty-five (25) pages; the patent owner’s reply to the opposition
`to the motion to amend is limited to twelve (12) pages; and the claim listing
`may be contained in an appendix to the motion, which does not count toward
`the page limit of the motion. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.24, 42.121(b);
`Amendments to the Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and
`Appeal Board, 80 Fed. Reg. 28,561, 28,565–66 (Final Rule) (May 19, 2015).
`Patent Owner is reminded that it must confer with the Board before
`filing a motion to amend. 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a). Patent Owner should
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`contact the Board to request the conference in sufficient time to ensure that
`the conference is conducted at least one week before DUE DATE 1.
`
`E. PETITIONER’S REPLY
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(c), the petitioner’s reply brief to the patent
`owner’s response is limited to twenty-five (25) pages. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.24(c); Amendments to the Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent
`Trial and Appeal Board, 80 Fed. Reg. at 28,565.
`
`F. OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), once trial has been instituted, any
`objection must be filed within five business days of service of evidence to
`which the objection is directed. The objection must identify the grounds for
`the objection with sufficient particularity to allow correction in the form of
`supplemental evidence. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1); Amendments to the
`Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 80
`Fed. Reg. at 28,565. The party relying on evidence to which an objection is
`timely served may respond to the objection by serving supplemental
`evidence within ten business days of service of the objection. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.64(b)(2); Amendments to the Rules of Practice for Trials Before the
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 80 Fed. Reg. at 28,565.
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL ....................... April 6, 2016, 2:00 p.m. ET
`
`DUE DATE 1 ............................................................................ June 20, 2016
`Patent owner’s response to the petition
`Patent owner’s motion to amend the patent
`
`DUE DATE 2 .................................................................. September 20, 2016
`Petitioner’s reply to patent owner’s response to petition
`Petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 3 ...................................................................... October 20, 2016
`Patent owner’s reply to petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 4 .................................................................. November 10, 2016
`Motion for observation regarding cross-examination of reply witness
`Motion to exclude evidence
`Request for oral argument
`
`DUE DATE 5 .................................................................. November 25, 2016
`Response to observation
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6 ..................................................................... December 1, 2016
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 7 ................................................................... December 15, 2016
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01806
`Patent RE43,931 E
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Stephen S. Korniczky
`Martin R. Bader
`David A. Randall
`Nam H. Kim
`Hector A. Agdeppa
`Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
`LegalTm-TCL-IPRs@sheppardmullin.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`W. Todd Baker
`Andrew Harry
`Sameer Gokhale
`Lisa Mandrusiak
`Alex Kuo
`Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP
`CPDocketBaker@oblon.com
`CPDocketHarry@oblon.com
`CPDocketGokhale@oblon.com
`CPDocketMandrusiak@oblon.com
`CPDocketKuo@oblon.com
`
`
`
`8
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
