`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 43
`Entered: August 21, 2017
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2016-01067; Patent 8,407,356 B11
`IPR2016-01141; Patent 8,458,245 B12
`IPR2016-01155; Patent 8,694,657 B13
`IPR2016-01156; Patent 8,458,245 B14
`IPR2016-01157; Patent 8,407,356 B1
`IPR2016-01158; Patent 8,473,552 B1
`IPR2016-01159; Patent 8,694,657 B15
`____________
`
`Before KARL D. EASTHOM, DAVID C. MCKONE, and J. JOHN LEE,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MCKONE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Case IPR2017-00624 has been joined with this proceeding.
`2 Case IPR2017-00655 has been joined with this proceeding
`3 Case IPR2017-00622 has been joined with this proceeding.
`4 Case IPR2017-00709 has been joined with this proceeding.
`5 Case IPR2017-00659 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01067, IPR2016-01141, IPR2016-01155, IPR2016-01156,
`IPR2016-01157, IPR2016-01158, IPR2016-01159
`
`The Revised Scheduling Order set October 19, 2017, as the date for
`oral argument in each of the above-captioned cases, if requested by the
`parties and granted by the Board. Paper 43.6 Both Petitioner and Patent
`Owner have requested oral argument in each case. Papers 50, 51. Petitioner
`requests one hour per side to argue collectively the cases originally filed by
`Facebook and thirty minutes per side to argue collectively the cases
`originally filed by Microsoft (since terminated as to Microsoft due to
`settlement). Paper 50, 2. Patent Owner requests one hour to present its
`arguments, although it is not clear whether Patent Owner requests one hour
`for all cases or one hour for each case. Paper 51, 1.
`The parties’ requests for oral argument are granted. Oral arguments
`will commence at 9:00 am Eastern Time on October 19, 2017, on the ninth
`floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`Due to the extensive overlap among the cases, we will hold a combined
`hearing for all of the above-captioned cases starting at 9:00 am. Each party
`is allotted one hour and thirty minutes total to present its case. Although, in
`this Order, we do not divide this time among the cases, we advise the parties
`to meet and confer to agree on a logical order of presentation.
`Petitioner will open the hearing by presenting its arguments regarding
`the challenged claims for which the Board instituted trial. Petitioner may
`reserve time for rebuttal arguments. Patent Owner will then respond to
`Petitioner’s arguments. Petitioner may then present rebuttal arguments.
`Patent Owner may not respond to Petitioner’s rebuttal arguments. We note
`that Patent Owner has filed papers styled Motions to Exclude Evidence.
`
`
`6 We refer to the papers filed in IPR2016-01067. Similar papers were filed
`by the parties in each of the above-captioned cases.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01067, IPR2016-01141, IPR2016-01155, IPR2016-01156,
`IPR2016-01157, IPR2016-01158, IPR2016-01159
`
`Paper 53. These motions, however, do not appear to address the
`admissibility of evidence; rather, they argue that Petitioner’s replies exceed
`proper scope. The Panel is capable of determining whether a reply exceeds
`its proper scope. Nevertheless, the parties should be prepared to answer
`questions from the Panel regarding the Motions to Exclude.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. The
`hearing will be open to the public via in-person attendance on a first-come,
`first-served basis.
`At least seven (7) business days prior to the hearing, each party shall
`serve on the other party any demonstrative exhibit(s) it intends to use during
`the hearing. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b). The parties should attempt to work
`out any objections to demonstratives prior to involving the Board. At least
`two (2) business days prior to the hearing, the parties shall file the
`demonstrative exhibits with the Board. See id. The parties are directed to
`St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the
`University of Michigan, Case IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014)
`(Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits. The parties must initiate a conference call with the Board at least
`two business days before the hearing to present any objection regarding the
`propriety of any demonstrative exhibit. Any objection to demonstrative
`exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered waived. As
`demonstrative exhibits are not themselves evidence, the Board asks the
`parties to confine demonstrative exhibit objections to those identifying
`egregious violations that are prejudicial to the administration of justice.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01067, IPR2016-01141, IPR2016-01155, IPR2016-01156,
`IPR2016-01157, IPR2016-01158, IPR2016-01159
`
`The parties are reminded that each presenter must identify clearly and
`specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number)
`referenced during each hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the
`reporter’s transcript. The parties also should note that at least one member
`of the panel will be attending the hearing electronically from a remote
`location and that if a demonstrative is not filed or otherwise made fully
`available or visible to the remote judge, that demonstrative will not be
`considered. The parties also should note that a panel member appearing
`remotely may not able to hear the parties unless they speak into the
`microphone at the podium. If the parties have questions as to whether
`demonstrative exhibits would be sufficiently visible and available to all of
`the judges, the parties are invited to contact the Board at (571) 272-9797.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the hearing. If a party anticipates 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 counsel of record, however, may present
`the party’s argument.
`The parties are reminded to direct their requests for audio-visual
`equipment to Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be
`honored unless presented in a separate communication directed to the above
`email address not less than five days before the hearing. If the request is not
`received timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the
`hearing.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01067, IPR2016-01141, IPR2016-01155, IPR2016-01156,
`IPR2016-01157, IPR2016-01158, IPR2016-01159
`
`ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that oral arguments for these proceedings shall take place
`beginning at 9:00 am Eastern Time on October 19, 2017, on the ninth floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Heidi Keefe
`Phillip E. Morton
`Andrew C. Mace
`Mark R. Weinstein
`Daniel J. Knauss
`COOLEY LLP
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`pmorton@cooley.com
`amace@cooley.com
`dknauss@cooley.com
`mweinstein@cooley.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Peter Lambrianakos
`Vincent Rubino
`Brown Rudnick LLP
`plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`vrubino@brownrudnick.com
`
`
`5
`
`