Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 25
`Entered: April 7, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CHESTNUT HILL SOUND INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before RAMA G. ELLURU and JOHN F. HORVATH,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ELLURU, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(10)
`
`
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 25
`Entered: April 7, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CHESTNUT HILL SOUND INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before RAMA G. ELLURU and JOHN F. HORVATH,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ELLURU, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(10)
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`
`Both parties request an oral hearing in this case pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.70. Petitioner requests that each party receive 30 minutes to present its
`arguments. Paper 22. Patent Owner requests that each party be granted 60
`minutes to present its arguments. Paper 21. Patent Owner identifies issues
`to be argued, including whether Petitioner’s reply raises issues that go
`beyond the scope of a proper reply. Id. at 1. Further, Patent Owner
`“requests that it be permitted to reserve up to fifteen (15) minutes of its’ oral
`argument time for after Petitioner’s reply to highlight issues in petitioner’s
`reply that exceed the proper scope of a reply.” Id. Petitioner opposes
`“Patent Owner’s request to reserve a portion of its time for after Petitioner’s
`presentation, as well as Patent Owner’s request to argue, for the first time at
`the Oral Argument, Patent Owner’s belief that Petitioner’s reply exceeds the
`proper scope of a reply.” Paper 22, 1. Regardless of whether Patent Owner
`raises the issue, we must make a determination as to whether Petitioner’s
`Reply is outside the scope of a proper reply. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b) (“A
`reply may only respond to arguments raised in the corresponding . . . patent
`owner response.”) Thus, we will hear Patent Owner’s position on this issue
`during the time allotted to Patent Owner as further explained below.
`Moreover, Petitioner will be given the opportunity to respond to Patent
`Owner’s position during the time allotted to Petitioner.
`Each party will have 60 minutes total time to present arguments for
`the case. Petitioner will proceed first to present its case with respect to the
`challenged claims and grounds for which the Board instituted trial.
`Thereafter, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s presentation. During
`its presentation, Patent Owner may explain its position with respect to
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`
`Petitioner’s Reply. Petitioner may reserve rebuttal time to respond to Patent
`Owner’s presentation.
`The hearing will commence at 1:00 PM Eastern Time, on April 20,
`2017, and it will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the ninth
`floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. In-
`person attendance will be accommodated on a firstcome, 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.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served
`seven business days prior to the hearing. The parties shall confer with each
`other regarding any objections to demonstrative exhibits. For any issue that
`cannot be resolved after conferring, the parties may each file a one-page list
`of objections at least three business days before the hearing. The list should
`identify with particularity which demonstrative exhibits are subject to
`objection and include a short statement (no more than one sentence) of the
`reason for each objection. No argument or further explanation is permitted.
`The Board will consider the objections and schedule a telephone
`conference if deemed necessary. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits
`that is not timely presented will be considered waived. The parties are
`directed to CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, Case
`IPR2013-00033, slip op. at 2–4 (PTAB October 23, 2013) (Paper 118),
`regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits. The
`demonstrative exhibits should be emailed to the Board no later than two
`business days prior to the hearing.
`The parties are reminded that the presenter must identify clearly and
`specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number)
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`
`referenced during the hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the
`reporter’s transcript.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present at the hearing,
`although any backup counsel may make the actual presentation, in whole or
`in part. If any lead counsel will not be in attendance at the hearing, the
`Board should be notified via a joint telephone conference call no later than
`two days prior to the hearing to discuss the matter.
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be
`directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual
`equipment are to be made five days in advance of the hearing date. The
`request is to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received
`timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00794
`Patent 8,090,309 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Joshua A. Griswold
`Katherine A. Vidal
`Dan Smith
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`IPR39521-0016IP2@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Hamad M. Hamad
`Alexis Mosser
`CALDWELL CASSADY CURRY, P.C.
`hhamad@caldwellcc.com
`amosser@caldwellcc.com
`
`5
`
`
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
