`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`ASUSTEK COMPUTER, INC. and ASUS COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL,
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES GENERAL IP (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case: IPR2016-00646
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,870,087
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a), Patent Owner Avago Technologies
`
`General IP (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (“Avago” or “Patent Owner”) requests oral
`
`argument before the Board in this inter partes review. Patent Owner respectfully
`
`requests one hour in which to present its arguments and the necessary equipment to
`
`project related demonstratives. Patent Owner requests that two counsel at the
`
`counsel’s table be allowed to use their computers at the hearing (in addition to the
`
`counsel making the argument using his or her computer to show the
`
`demonstratives), to avoid the need for the parties to bring entire paper copies of the
`
`record into the hearing room and to facilitate efficient answering of panel
`
`questions.
`
`Without intending to waive any issue not specifically identified, Patent
`
`Owner specifies the following issues to be argued:
`
`1. Whether Petitioners ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. and ASUS Computer
`
`International (collectively, “ASUS” or “Petitioners”) have met their burden of
`
`proving that claims 1, 7, 10, 11, and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 5,870,087 (“the ’087
`
`Patent”) are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over U.S. Patent No. 5,898,695
`
`(“Fujii”).
`
`2. Whether Petitioners have met their burden of proving that claims 1, 5,
`
`7-11, and 16 of the ’087 Patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
`
`Fujii in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,960,464 (“Lam”).
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3. Whether Petitioners have met their burden of proving that claims 7-9
`
`of the ’087 Patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Fujii in view of
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,847,771 (“Cloutier”).
`
`4. Whether Petitioners have met their burden of proving that claims 7-9
`
`of the ’087 Patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Fujii in view of
`
`Lam in further view of Cloutier.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`The content of Patent Owner’s Response.
`
`The scope and content of Petitioners’ Petition and Reply.
`
`Any additional issues raised by Petitioners during oral argument.
`
`Any other issue(s) that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board desires to
`
`have addressed.
`
`Date: April 6, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: s/ Kristopher L. Reed
`Kristopher L. Reed
`Registration No. 58694
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certified that on this
`
`6th day of April, 2017, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT to be
`
`served via e-mail (as agreed by Counsel for Petitioners) on the following
`
`counsel of record for the Petitioners:
`
`Scott Stevens (Lead Counsel)
`Derek Neilson (Back-up Counsel)
`Alston & Bird LLP
`101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000
`Charlotte, NC 28280
`scott.stevens@alston.com
`derek.neilson@alston.com
`
`By: s/ Kristopher L. Reed
`Kristopher L. Reed
`Registration No. 58,694
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Date: April 6, 2017
`
`
`69264732V.1
`
`3
`
`
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
