throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`ARISTA NETWORKS, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR20l6—O0309
`
`Patent 7,224,668 B1
`
`PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`
`P.O. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`

`

`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70, the Board’s June 11, 2016 Scheduling Order
`
`(Paper 9), and the parties’ subsequent joint stipulations to modify the scheduling
`
`order—Papers 16, 17 and 27, Patent Owner Cisco Systems, Inc. respectfully
`
`requests oral argument in Alexandria, Virginia at 600 Delany Street, which is
`
`currently scheduled for March 7, 2017. Patent Owner currently has two Federal
`
`Circuit arguments on March 7 and March 13 that will require its counsel to be in
`
`Washington, D.C. Furthermore, Cisco’s in-house counsel is located on the East
`
`Coast (Atlanta) and its PTAB counsel is located in Washington, D.C.
`
`Patent Owner will address issues raised in the Petition for Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent 7,224,668 (“the ’668 patent”), Patent Owner’s Preliminary
`
`Response, Patent Owner’s Response, Petitior1er’s Reply to Patent Owner’s
`
`Response, Patent Owner’s Motions for Observations on Cross Examination (if
`
`filed), any Responses to Motions for Observations (if filed), and any Motions to
`
`Exclude and corresponding Oppositions and Replies (if filed).
`
`The issues to be argued are:
`
`(1) whether claims 1-6, 8, 9, 15-22, 24-27, 33-36, 55-58, 60-63, and 69-
`
`72 of the ’668 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over a combination
`
`of Amara and CoreBuilder;
`
`(2) whether claims 7, 23, and 59 of the ’668 patent are unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) over a combination of Amara, CoreBuilder, and Moberg; and
`
`

`

`IPR2016-00309
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 B1
`
`(3) Whether claims 10, 12, 13, 28, 30, 31, 64, 66, and 67 ofthe ’668
`
`patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over a combination of Amara,
`
`CoreBui1der, and Hendel.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & Fox P.L.L.C.
`a.‘
`x’‘'‘.-*
`
`
`
`\I:ori A. G6rdon (Reg. No. 50,633)
`Daniel S. Block (Reg. No. 68,395)
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`Date: January 27, 2017
`
`

`

`IPR2016-00309
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 B1
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT was served electronically via e-mail on
`
`January 27, 2017 in its entirety on the following:
`
`W. Karl Renner (Lead Counsel)
`Lauren A. Degnan (Back-Up Counsel)
`Adam R. Shartzer (Back-Up Counsel)
`Steven R. Katz (Back-Up Counsel)
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`
`3200 RBC Plaza
`
`60 South Sixth Street
`
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(202) 783-5070 telephone
`(202) 783-2331 facsimile
`lPR40963-0003 IP4§wf1‘.co1n
`
`PTABlnboundgwfncom
`
`Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
`
`.«
`
`K
`
`L‘
`“
`Ldr1“)A. Gordon R
`Registration No. 50,633
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`Date: January 27, 2017
`
`1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
`
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`(202) 371-2600
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket