`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 8
`Entered: December 21, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ZTE (USA) INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG
`ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., HTC CORPORATION, and
`HTC AMERICA, INC.,
` Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`EVOLVED WIRELESS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-01280
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before CHRISTOPHER L. CRUMBLEY, PATRICK M. BOUCHER, and
`TERRENCE W. McMILLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McMILLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Instituting Inter Partes Review and Consolidating with IPR2016-01209
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.122(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01209
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`We have instituted trial in IPR2016-01209. The Petition herein states that it
`
`“is identical in substance to the petition that Apple Inc. et al. filed on June 20, 2016
`in IPR2016-01209 (‘the Apple proceeding’),” and is “limited to the same claims,
`grounds, arguments, and evidence presented in the Apple proceeding.” Pet. 1.
`Petitioner states that it intends to seek joinder with the Apple proceeding under 35
`U.S.C. § 315(c), 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22, and 42.122(b). Id.
`For the reasons expressed in our Decision instituting trial in the Apple
`proceeding, we likewise determine that the record in this proceeding establishes a
`reasonable likelihood that Petitioners will prevail in showing that claims 1–10 of
`U.S. Patent No. 7,746,916 B2 (“the ’916 patent”) are unpatentable. We, therefore,
`institute trial as we did in IPR2016-01209, and consolidate the two inter partes
`reviews, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 315(d) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.122(a). A motion for
`joinder is not required.
`
`ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314, an inter partes review is
`hereby instituted on the following grounds:
`1. Whether claims 1–3, 5–8, and 10 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102
`as having been anticipated by Zhuang175;
`2. Whether claims 4 and 9 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
`having been obvious over Zhuang175 and Popović;
`3. Whether claims 1–3, 5–8, and 10 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`as having been obvious over Zhuang175 and Hou;
`4. Whether claims 4 and 9 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
`having been obvious over Zhuang175, Hou, and Popović;
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01209
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5. Whether claims 6–8 and 10 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
`having been obvious over Zhuang175 and Fukuta; and
`6. Whether claim 9 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as having been
`obvious over Zhuang175, Fukuta, and Popović;
`FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) and 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.4, notice is hereby given of the institution of a trial on the grounds of
`unpatentability authorized above; the trial commences on the entry date of this
`Decision; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §315(d) and 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.122(a), this inter partes review is hereby consolidated with the trial in
`IPR2016-01209;
`FURTHER ORDERED that all future filings are to be made in IPR2016-
`01209, using the combined case caption as attached to this Decision;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner and the Petitioner in IPR2016-01209
`(“Petitioners”) will share all time permitted for depositions and will file all papers,
`except for papers that do not involve the other petitioner, as a consolidated paper,
`and that consolidated papers will not be given additional pages or words unless
`otherwise authorized by the Board;
`FURTHER ORDERED that, if a petitioner wishes to make statements or
`provide information or material separately from the other petitioner in a
`consolidated paper, the paper must identify and attribute such separate statements
`and information or material clearly;
`FURTHER ORDERED that, for purposes of accessing the electronic record,
`counsel for Petitioner will be added as backup counsel of record of the Petitioner in
`IPR2016-01209 (e.g., by filing an appearance in that case), and that only a single
`attorney may be designated as lead counsel for Petitioners;
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01209
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Decision shall be entered in the
`record of IPR2016-01209.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01209
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Roberto J. Devoto
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`IPR00035-0006IP2@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`Charles McMahon
`Hersh Mehta
`MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY
`cmcmahon@mwe.com
`hmehta@mwe.com
`
`James Glass
`Kevin Johnson
`Todd Briggs
`John McKee
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com
`toddbriggs@quinnemanuel.com
`johnmckee@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Stephen Korniczky
`Martin Bader
`Ericka Schulz
`SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
`skorniczky@sheppardmullin.com
`mbader@sheppardmullin.com
`eschulz@sheppardmullin.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Cyrus Morton
`Ryan M. Schultz
`ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
`cmorton@robinskaplan.com
`rschultz@robinskaplan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01209
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE, INC., HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC., MICROSOFT
`CORPORATION, MICROSOFT MOBILE OY, MICROSOFT MOBILE, INC.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC., and ZTE (USA) INC.,
`
` Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`EVOLVED WIRELESS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-012091
`Patent 7,746,916 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2016-01280 has been consolidated with this proceeding.