`_________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`
`E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY and
`ARCHER-DANIELS-MIDLAND COMPANY,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`FURANIX TECHNOLOGIES B.V.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`Case IPR2015-01838
`Patent 8,865,921
`_________________________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to the modified Scheduling Order in this IPR Proceeding (see PTO
`
`Paper No. 21), Patent Owner, Furanix Technologies, B.V., respectfully requests an
`
`oral argument in this IPR Proceeding, which is currently scheduled for November
`
`16, 2016 (see PTO Paper No. 11, original Scheduling Order).
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a), Patent Owner intends to argue the
`
`following issues during the oral argument:
`
`1. Any issues raised in the Decision on Institution of this IPR
`
`Proceeding (PTO Paper No. 10).
`
`2. Any issues addressed by Patent Owners during the IPR, including
`
`in Patent Owner’s Response to the Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`in this matter (PTO Paper No. 23) and its associated Exhibits.
`
`3. Any issues properly raised by Petitioners in this matter, including in
`
`their Petition for Inter Partes Review (PTO Paper No. 1) and
`
`Petitioners’ Reply (PTO Paper No. 29) and their respective
`
`associated Exhibits.
`
`4. Any issues raised in Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude evidence in
`
`this IPR Proceeding and Patent Owner’s Motion for Observations in
`
`this IPR Proceeding, each of which is being filed concurrently with
`
`the instant paper.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`5. Any motion to exclude evidence or motion for observations filed
`
`by Petitioners.
`
`Because of the number of matters disputed, Patent Owner respectfully
`
`requests sixty (60) minutes per side for the oral argument. Patent Owner also
`
`requests the ability to use audio/visual equipment to display demonstrative
`
`exhibits, including the use of a projector and screen for a PowerPoint presentation.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/ Paul M. Richter, Jr. /
`Paul M. Richter, Jr., Reg. No. 36,254
`Mark A. Chapman (admitted pro hac vice)
`
`ANDREWS KURTH KENYON LLP
`One Broadway
`New York, NY 10004-1007
`Tel: 212-425-7200
`Fax: 212-425-5288
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner Furanix
`Technologies B.V.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Dated: October 14, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing “PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.70” was served
`
`electronically via email as follows:
`
`Jonathan W. S. England
`Reg. No. 71,223
`BLANK ROME LLP
`1825 Eye Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel (202) 420-2747
`Fax (202) 420-2201
`jwengland@blankrome.com
`
`
`/ Paul M. Richter, Jr. /
`Paul M. Richter
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner Furanix
`Technologies B.V.
`
`
`
`Michael S. Marcus
`Reg. No. 31,727
`BLANK ROME LLP
`1825 Eye Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel (202) 420-3702
`Fax (202) 420-2201
`mmarcus@blankrome.com
`
`Dipu A. Doshi
`Reg. No. 60,373
`BLANK ROME LLP
`1825 Eye Street NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel (202) 420-2604
`Fax (202) 420-2201
`ddoshi@blankrome.com
`
`
`
`Dated: October 14, 2016