`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 38
`Entered: November 29, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-019741
`Patent 7,647,633 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`Before THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, MIRIAM L. QUINN, and
`PATRICK M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Requests for Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`1 Case IPR2016-00480 (filed by Blue Coat Systems, Inc.) has been joined
`with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01974
`Patent 7,647,633 B2
`
`
`The date set for oral hearing in each of these proceedings is January 5,
`2017, if hearing is requested by either party and granted by the Board. Paper
`8. Both parties request oral hearing. Papers 32, 34. The requests are
`granted.
`Each side will have 60 minutes, total, to present its argument.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s claims at
`issue in these reviews are unpatentable. Both parties have filed Motions to
`Exclude Evidence of the other party, and respectively bear the burden of
`proof with respect to those Motions. Accordingly, Petitioner will open the
`hearing by presenting its case regarding the challenged claims for which the
`Board instituted trial, including addressing, if it wishes, its Motion to
`Exclude. After Petitioner’s presentation, Patent Owner will respond to
`Petitioner’s argument and also argue, if it wishes, in support of its Motion to
`Exclude.
`Each side may reserve time to respond to arguments presented by the
`other side, with some limitations. Specifically, to the extent that Petitioner
`reserves rebuttal time, it may respond to Patent Owner’s presentation on all
`matters. To the extent Patent Owner reserves rebuttal time, however, it may
`respond only to Petitioner’s arguments opposing Patent Owner’s Motion to
`Exclude and Petitioner’s arguments concerning Patent Owner’s secondary
`considerations of non-obviousness.
`The hearing will commence at 10 AM Eastern Standard Time on
`January 5, 2017, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany
`Street, Alexandria, Virginia. The Board will provide a court reporter for the
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01974
`Patent 7,647,633 B2
`
`hearing and the reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the
`hearing. At least one member of the panel may be attending the oral
`argument remotely by use of two-way audio-visual communication
`equipment. The hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance
`that will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. If the parties
`have any concern about disclosing confidential information, they are
`requested to contact the Board at least 10 days in advance of the hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`The parties are reminded that, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(7), a
`proponent of deposition testimony must file such testimony as an exhibit.
`The Board will not consider any deposition testimony that has not been so
`filed.
`
`Furthermore, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must
`be served at least seven business days before the hearing date. The parties
`also shall provide a courtesy copy of any demonstrative exhibits to the
`Board at least seven business days prior to the hearing by emailing them
`to Trials@uspto.gov. The parties shall not file any demonstrative exhibits in
`this proceeding without prior authorization from the Board.
`The parties must file any objections to the demonstrative exhibits with
`the Board at least two business days before the hearing. Any objection to
`demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered
`waived. The objections should identify with particularity which
`demonstrative exhibits are subject to objection, and include a short (one
`sentence or less) statement of the reason for each objection. No argument or
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01974
`Patent 7,647,633 B2
`
`further explanation is permitted. The Board will consider the objections and
`schedule a conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will
`reserve ruling on the objections until after the oral argument. The parties are
`directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of
`Regents of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB January 27,
`2014) (Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of
`demonstrative exhibits.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. However, any counsel of record may present the party’s
`argument. If either party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending
`the oral argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference
`with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`Any special requests for audio-visual equipment should be directed
`to Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be honored
`unless presented in a separate communication not less than five days before
`the hearing directed to the above email address.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01974
`Patent 7,647,633 B2
`
`PETITIONER
`For Palo Alto Networks:
`Orion Armon (Lead Counsel)
`Jennifer Volk (Back-up Counsel)
`Max Colice (Back-up Counsel)
`Brian Eutermoser (Back-up Counsel)
`oarmon@cooley.com
`jvolkfortier@cooley.com
`mcolice@cooley.com
`beutermoser@cooley.com
`
`For Blue Coat Systems:
`Michael T. Rosato (Lead Counsel)
`Andrew S. Brown (Back-up counsel)
`Neil N. Desai (Back-up counsel)
`mrosato@wsgr.com
`asbrown@wsgr.com
`ndesai@wsgr.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER
`
`James Hannah (Lead Counsel)
`Jeffrey H. Price (Back-up Counsel)
`Michael Kim (Back-up Counsel)
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`jprice@kramerlevin.com
`mkim@finjan.com
`
`
`
`5