Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 24
`
`Entered: January 31, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ADAPTIVE HEADLAMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge,
`and RAMA G. ELLURU and SCOTT C. MOORE, Administrative Patent
`Judges.
`
`MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER GRANTING REQUESTS FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 24
`
`Entered: January 31, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ADAPTIVE HEADLAMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge,
`and RAMA G. ELLURU and SCOTT C. MOORE, Administrative Patent
`Judges.
`
`MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER GRANTING REQUESTS FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`
`
`On January 19, 2017, Petitioner and Patent Owner filed requests for
`
`oral argument in the above-captioned proceeding. Papers 22, 23. Patent
`
`Owner requested one hour per side of oral argument. Paper 23, 2. Petitioner
`
`requested that each side be allotted no more than one hour for oral argument.
`
`Paper 22, 2.
`
`The parties’ requests for oral argument are granted. Due to a
`
`scheduling conflict, the oral hearing has been rescheduled for the morning
`
`of February 23, 2017. The hearing will commence at 10:00 AM on
`
`February 23, 2017, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East,
`
`600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. The hearing will be open to the
`
`public. In-person attendance will be accommodated on a first come, first
`
`served basis. The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the
`
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing.
`
`Each party will have 50 minutes of total time to present arguments.
`
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof, and thus will proceed first to
`
`present its arguments as to the challenged claims. Petitioner may reserve
`
`rebuttal time, if desired. Next, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s
`
`arguments. After Patent Owner concludes its presentation, Petitioner may
`
`present rebuttal arguments if it has reserved time to do so. Such arguments
`
`must be responsive to, and may not exceed the scope of, Patent Owner’s
`
`arguments.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), the parties shall serve any
`
`demonstrative exhibits upon each other at least seven business days prior to
`
`the hearing. The parties also shall provide the demonstrative exhibits to the
`
`Board at least seven business days prior to the hearing by emailing them to
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov. The parties shall not file any demonstrative exhibits in
`
`this case without our prior authorization. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(b),
`
`42.70(b). The parties are directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division,
`
`Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, Case IPR2013-
`
`00041, slip op. 2–5 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65), and CBS Interactive
`
`Inc., v. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, Case IPR2013-00033, slip op. at 2–
`
`4 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013) (Paper 118), for guidance regarding the appropriate
`
`content of demonstrative exhibits. To aid in the preparation of an accurate
`
`transcript, each party shall provide paper copies of its demonstratives to the
`
`court reporter on the day of the oral hearing. Such paper copies shall not
`
`become part of the record of this proceeding.
`
`Any requests regarding special equipment or needs, such as for
`
`audiovisual equipment, must be submitted via e-mail to Trials@uspto.gov.
`
`Requests for special equipment will not be honored unless presented in a
`
`separate communication directed to the identified email address not less
`
`than five business days before the hearing.
`
`The parties are advised that one or more members of the panel may
`
`participate in the hearing remotely. If a demonstrative is not provided to the
`
`Board in the manner indicated above, that demonstrative may not be
`
`available to each of the judges during the hearing, and may not be
`
`considered. The parties are further advised that images projected using
`
`audiovisual equipment in Alexandria may not be visible to panel members
`
`who are attending remotely.
`
`Because of limitations of the audio transmission systems in our
`
`hearing rooms, the presenter may speak only when standing at the hearing
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`
`
`room lectern. The parties also are reminded that the presenter must identify
`
`clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen
`
`number), paper, or exhibit referenced during its argument in order to allow
`
`each judge to follow the presenter’s arguments and ensure the clarity and
`
`accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`
`The parties are granted leave to use laptop computers at the counsel
`
`tables. The parties, however, are cautioned that counsel may not use laptops
`
`to make or transmit audio or visual recordings of the proceeding, or to
`
`communicate with individuals outside of the hearing room. Laptops may
`
`not be connected to the Internet (including via cellular modem) during the
`
`4
`
`hearing.
`
`
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Peter Cuomo
`pjcuomo@mintz.com
`
`Kongsik Kim
`kkim@mintz.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brett Pinkus
`pinkus@fsclaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
