`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`__________
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01389
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,155,012
`
`
`
`__________
`
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF FEBRUARY 21, 2017 TELEPHONIC HEARING
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`10142129
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Michael Fleming
`
`Michael Fleming (Reg. No. 67,933)
`Nima Hefazi (Reg. No. 63,658)
`Jonathan Kagan, Pro Hac Vice
`Talin Gordnia, Pro Hac Vice pending
`IRELL & MANELLA LLP
`1800 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 900
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner,
`Juniper Networks, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: March 10, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10142129
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`Case IPR2016-01389
`Patent 8,155,012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. sections 42.6 that a complete copy of
`
`the TRANSCRIPT OF FEBRUARY 21, 2017 TELEPHONIC HEARING is
`
`being served by electronic mail, as agreed to by the parties, the same day as the
`
`filing of the above-identified documents in the United States Patent and Trademark
`
`Office/Patent Trial and Appeal Board, upon:
`
`Frank A. Angileri (Reg. No. 36,733)
`Thomas A. Lewry (Reg. No. 30,770)
`Marc Lorelli (Reg. No. 43,759)
`Christopher C. Smith (Reg. No. 59,669)
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`1000 Town Center, 22nd Floor
`Southfield, MI 48075
`CHRMC0108IPR1@brookskushman.com
`
`
`
`Richard W. Hoffman (Reg. No. 33,711)
`REISING ETHINGTON PC
`755 West Big Beaver Rd., Ste. 1850
`Troy, MI 48084
`Hoffman@reising.com
`
`
`
` /Susan M. Langworthy/
` Susan M. Langworthy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`Case IPR2016-01389
`Patent 8,155,012
`
`
`
`10142129
`
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2· · · · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·- - -
`
`·4
`
`·5
`
`·6· ·JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,· · · · ) Case IPR2016-01389
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,· · ) Patent No. 8,155,012 B2
`
`·8· · · · · · vs.· · · · · · · · · ·) Case IPR2016-01391
`
`·9· ·CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC.,· · · · ·) Patent No. 8,942,107 B2
`
`10· · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.· ) Case IPR2016-01397
`
`11· ·-· -· -· -· -· -· -· -· -· -· ·) Patent No. 9,019,838 B2
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Case IPR2016-01399
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Patent No. 8,902,760 B2
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16· · · · · · · · TRANSCRIPT OF TELEPHONIC HEARING
`
`17· · · · ·BEFORE KARL D. EASTHOM, GREGG I. ANDERSON AND
`
`18· · · ·ROBERT J. WEINSCHENK, ADMINISTRATIVE PATENT JUDGES
`
`19· · · · · · · · · ·TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2017
`
`20· · · · · · · · · · · · · 12:30 P.M.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23· ·Reported by:
`
`24· · · · · · TERI J. NELSON
`
`25· · · · · · CSR NO. 7682
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · Reporter's Transcript of Telephonic Hearing
`
`·2· ·before Karl D. Easthom, Gregg I. Anderson and
`
`·3· ·Robert J. Weinschenk, Administrative Patent Judges,
`
`·4· ·Tuesday, February 21, 2017, 12:30 P.M., before
`
`·5· ·Teri J. Nelson, CSR No. 7682, pursuant to Notice.
`
`·6
`
`·7· ·APPEARANCES (All Telephonic):
`
`·8
`
`·9· ·ADMINISTRATIVE PATENT JUDGES:
`
`10· · · · · · JUDGE KARL D. EASTHOM
`
`11· · · · · · JUDGE GREGG I. ANDERSON
`
`12· · · · · · JUDGE ROBERT J. WEINSCHENK
`
`13
`
`14· ·FOR PETITIONER JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.:
`
`15· · · · · · IRELL & MANELLA LLP
`
`16· · · · · · BY:· MICHAEL R. FLEMING, ESQ.
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·TALIN GORDNIA, ESQ.
`
`18· · · · · · 1800 Avenue of the Stars
`
`19· · · · · · Suite 900
`
`20· · · · · · Los Angeles, California 90067-4276
`
`21· · · · · · 310-277-1010
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· ·APPEARANCES (All Telephonic)(Continued):
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·FOR PATENT OWNER CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC.:
`
`·4· · · · · · BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`
`·5· · · · · · BY:· FRANK ANGILERI, ESQ.
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·THOMAS LEWRY, ESQ.
`
`·7· · · · · · · · ·CHRISTOPHER SMITH, ESQ.
`
`·8· · · · · · 1000 Town Center
`
`·9· · · · · · 22nd Floor
`
`10· · · · · · Southfield, Michigan 48075-1238
`
`11· · · · · · 248-358-4400
`
`12· · · · · · -and-
`
`13· · · · · · REISING ETHINGTON P.C.
`
`14· · · · · · BY:· RICHARD W. HOFFMAN, ESQ.
`
`15· · · · · · 755 West Big Beaver Road
`
`16· · · · · · Suite 1850
`
`17· · · · · · Troy, Michigan 48084
`
`18· · · · · · 248-689-3500
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2017
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · 12:30 P.M.
`
`·3
`
`·4· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Hello, this is Judge Easthom
`
`·5· ·from the Patent Office.
`
`·6· · · · · · We have Judge Anderson and Judge Weinschenk on
`
`·7· ·the phone.
`
`·8· · · · · · Also, I think I interrupted somebody.
`
`·9· · · · · · It sounded like a court reporter; is that
`
`10· ·correct?
`
`11· · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Yes, sir.
`
`12· · · · · · Teri Nelson with DTI.
`
`13· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Oh, thank you, Ms. Nelson.
`
`14· · · · · · Go ahead.
`
`15· · · · · · Were you trying to get people -- people to
`
`16· ·report in?
`
`17· · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Yes, I think we were just trying
`
`18· ·to get the names of everybody who's on the call.
`
`19· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Great.
`
`20· · · · · · Could we just start over for the -- so that the
`
`21· ·Judges can hear, myself included?
`
`22· · · · · · I just joined on.
`
`23· · · · · · I apologize.
`
`24· · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Certainly.
`
`25· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Start over with --
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Sure.
`
`·2· · · · · · This is --
`
`·3· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Hi, Your Honor.
`
`·4· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Hello.
`
`·5· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Your Honor, this is Talin Gordnia
`
`·6· ·and Mike Fleming from the law firm of Irell & Manella,
`
`·7· ·and we represent the Petitioner Juniper.
`
`·8· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Great.
`
`·9· · · · · · Okay.· Welcome, Ms. Gordnia and Mr. Fleming.
`
`10· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Your Honor, this is Frank
`
`11· ·Angileri, and with me are Tom Lewry and Chris Smith.
`
`12· ·We're from Brooks Kushman, which, just to refresh the
`
`13· ·Court's recollection, we're the new firm in this case.
`
`14· · · · · · And I'm not sure you're familiar.· We're in
`
`15· ·because of a conflict from prior lead counsel, and there
`
`16· ·were motions filed yesterday to handle the withdrawal.
`
`17· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Right.
`
`18· · · · · · Mr. Angileri, you're the new lead, correct, for
`
`19· ·Patent Owner?
`
`20· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· That's correct.
`
`21· · · · · · And one of the reasons for just raising that
`
`22· ·with you now is I want to make sure that the Board is
`
`23· ·okay with me speaking.· I wasn't sure if that motion had
`
`24· ·been granted yet.
`
`25· · · · · · And Justin Cohen is not on the line right now.
`
`
`
`·1· ·He's the former lead.
`
`·2· · · · · · And if the Board needs him, I can try to get him
`
`·3· ·on, but I just wanted to make sure we have who you need.
`
`·4· · · · · · MR. HOFFMAN:· And just FYI, Rick Hoffman is also
`
`·5· ·on the line for Reising Ethington.
`
`·6· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`·7· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· For the Patent Owner.
`
`·8· · · · · · MR. HOFFMAN:· For the Patent Owner, right.
`
`·9· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· One second, please, Mr. Hoffman.
`
`10· · · · · · Okay.· I don't think we have any problem with
`
`11· ·whether or not we grant the motion at this point.
`
`12· · · · · · We're not -- I think we told you to file your
`
`13· ·mandatory notice, Mr. -- Mr. Angileri --
`
`14· · · · · · Mr. Angileri?
`
`15· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Angileri.
`
`16· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Angileri.
`
`17· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· And yes, we did file the new
`
`18· ·mandatory notice for a new power of attorney --
`
`19· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`20· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· -- with the motion to withdraw.
`
`21· ·Justin Cohen, the former lead, filed those documents
`
`22· ·yesterday.
`
`23· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`24· · · · · · So we have Mr. Angileri and Mr. Hoffman for
`
`25· ·Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · And one second.
`
`·2· · · · · · Let me get -- okay.
`
`·3· · · · · · And then I'm probably not going to pronounce
`
`·4· ·this right.
`
`·5· · · · · · Is it Gordinia?
`
`·6· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Gordnia, Your Honor.
`
`·7· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Gordnia for Petitioner.
`
`·8· ·Gordnia.
`
`·9· · · · · · Okay.· Thank you.
`
`10· · · · · · And then we have Mr. Fleming; correct?
`
`11· · · · · · MR. FLEMING:· That's correct.
`
`12· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`13· · · · · · So I understand there's some -- something we're
`
`14· ·supposed to work out here, we're trying to get a schedule
`
`15· ·worked out, and I know the parties have sent in three
`
`16· ·dates.· These are for cases IPR2016-1389, 1391, 1397 and
`
`17· ·1399, and we have the -- we have -- it's Juniper Networks
`
`18· ·versus Chrimar Systems, Inc.?
`
`19· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· That's correct, Your Honor.
`
`20· · · · · · This is Frank Angileri.
`
`21· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Thank you, Mr. Angileri.
`
`22· · · · · · And then we -- I know that the parties sent in
`
`23· ·three proposed dates for the hearing, so that's 8/23,
`
`24· ·8/24 and 8/31; is that correct, Mr. Angileri?
`
`25· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Yes, Your Honor.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· So it looks like we have
`
`·2· ·due date 7 worked out.
`
`·3· · · · · · We'll -- the Board will pick one of those three,
`
`·4· ·if that's -- if that's okay with the parties, and I
`
`·5· ·assume that's what you've agreed upon; is that correct,
`
`·6· ·Ms. Gordinia -- Gordnia?
`
`·7· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· That --
`
`·8· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Sorry.
`
`·9· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· That's correct.· Yes.
`
`10· · · · · · Thank you.
`
`11· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.
`
`12· · · · · · Okay.· So -- so we just have to work out these
`
`13· ·other six dates; is that correct, due dates 1 through 6?
`
`14· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Yes, Your Honor.
`
`15· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· So why don't you go
`
`16· ·ahead, Mr. Angileri, and tell us what the story is on
`
`17· ·those, please.
`
`18· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Sure.
`
`19· · · · · · To sort of put the lead first, Your Honor, we
`
`20· ·would like to get the -- a schedule that allows us to
`
`21· ·move due date 1 into early April.
`
`22· · · · · · The reason is -- is simply that Chrimar's prior
`
`23· ·lead counsel became aware of a conflict I believe in late
`
`24· ·January.· We don't have personal information of all the
`
`25· ·details.· We got involved relatively soon thereafter.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · We have entered appearances for Chrimar in some
`
`·2· ·state and District Court litigation, but we do not have,
`
`·3· ·or at least at the time, rather, we did not have
`
`·4· ·familiarity with the prior art, and then we have other
`
`·5· ·personal and professional conflicts in late March that of
`
`·6· ·course we had before Chrimar came to us with this matter,
`
`·7· ·but we are stepping up to represent Chrimar.
`
`·8· · · · · · So really in an effort to prevent Chrimar from
`
`·9· ·being prejudiced, we're hoping to get our opening brief
`
`10· ·moved into -- the Patent Owner response moved into, like,
`
`11· ·the second week in April, if possible.· We think that --
`
`12· ·that lines up with the due dates that the Board has
`
`13· ·proposed.· We were okay with the due dates in September
`
`14· ·as well, but -- rather the due date 7 that the Board has
`
`15· ·proposed, we were okay with the due date 7 in September,
`
`16· ·but they did not work for Petitioner, so we're obviously
`
`17· ·good also with the due dates in late August, but we think
`
`18· ·that a schedule more on the lines of some of the existing
`
`19· ·schedules can -- can be achieved for all four of the IPRs
`
`20· ·and -- and then still have our due date 1 in the second
`
`21· ·week in April.
`
`22· · · · · · So that's what we're asking for.
`
`23· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Thank you, Mr. Angileri.
`
`24· · · · · · And Ms. Gordin- -- Gordnia, I'm sorry again, can
`
`25· ·you explain why that's a problem for the Petitioner,
`
`
`
`·1· ·please?
`
`·2· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Sure.
`
`·3· · · · · · Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`·4· · · · · · So just -- just to start, the mandatory notices
`
`·5· ·that Chrimar filed yesterday reflect that Mr. Rick
`
`·6· ·Hoffman, who has been counsel for the Patent Owner, is
`
`·7· ·continuing to stay on as counsel for the Patent Owner, so
`
`·8· ·we just want to note for the record that it's not a
`
`·9· ·complete change in counsel that's happening here.
`
`10· · · · · · Also, we -- we were happy with the existing
`
`11· ·schedule that the Board has set for the four IPRs, and
`
`12· ·particularly once it became clear that the hearing date
`
`13· ·would be changing pursuant to Chrimar's request of the
`
`14· ·Board and that there would be one common hearing date for
`
`15· ·all four, we proposed to Chrimar to keep the original
`
`16· ·schedules as is as set by the Board for the 1391, 1397
`
`17· ·and 1399 IPRs because that allowed for us to have the
`
`18· ·hearing date within the time frame provided by the Board,
`
`19· ·but we did agree to -- we agreed with them to change the
`
`20· ·1389 schedule to the dates that they had last proposed to
`
`21· ·the Board and to only change that -- that IPR schedule
`
`22· ·because that's the only one that needs to be changed in
`
`23· ·light of the new hearing dates.
`
`24· · · · · · And I'm happy to read those dates off.
`
`25· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· No.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · I think -- I think I have them.· I think I
`
`·2· ·have -- we have all the dates --
`
`·3· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Okay.
`
`·4· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· -- you E-mailed us, but --
`
`·5· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Sure.
`
`·6· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· -- you know, I appreciate that.
`
`·7· · · · · · I'm just trying to look at the schedule.
`
`·8· · · · · · So that -- that wouldn't really accommodate --
`
`·9· ·that wouldn't accommodate petition -- Patent Owner's
`
`10· ·problem that they said they have with lack of -- I know
`
`11· ·you said Mr. Hoffman's here, but Mr. Angileri's trying to
`
`12· ·get on -- up to speed, it sounds like, with the --
`
`13· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Exactly.
`
`14· · · · · · Well, so we -- on our last call with counsel for
`
`15· ·Chrimar this morning, we offered as a compromise position
`
`16· ·to change -- because they're interested in having a
`
`17· ·common schedule, we proposed to them using the existing
`
`18· ·1399 and 97 schedules for all IPRs, and what that does is
`
`19· ·it moves their first response date from March 8th out to
`
`20· ·March 23rd and giving them extra time there, and they
`
`21· ·said that that still was not enough time, so we offered
`
`22· ·to move that due date 1 from March 23rd to March 30th and
`
`23· ·to make that the common deadline, so that's giving them
`
`24· ·20-some additional days on the 1391 and an extra week on
`
`25· ·the 1397 and 99.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · And just -- just to step back, we -- we heard
`
`·2· ·Chrimar's counsel say that there's been a conflict, but
`
`·3· ·all we know is that there's an alleged conflict, and
`
`·4· ·there's some personal date conflicts that's also driving
`
`·5· ·their request for a new schedule.
`
`·6· · · · · · And there's nothing in the record, there's no
`
`·7· ·evidence showing good cause for why these schedules need
`
`·8· ·to change, and it seems that if the schedules are to
`
`·9· ·change so drastically, for example Chrimar is asking for
`
`10· ·a one-month extension on their first response date, we
`
`11· ·think that Chrimar should put in the record justification
`
`12· ·for good cause and file a motion for why the schedule
`
`13· ·needs to -- to change and why they need additional time
`
`14· ·because currently, there's nothing in the record
`
`15· ·justifying this change or showing good cause.
`
`16· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· So I think I understand
`
`17· ·what you're saying.
`
`18· · · · · · It sounds like you're a week off, basically,
`
`19· ·then, is that right, for the March 30th versus April 7th?
`
`20· · · · · · Is that --
`
`21· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Yes.
`
`22· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· You offered --
`
`23· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· I'm sorry.
`
`24· · · · · · I didn't mean to talk over you, Your Honor.
`
`25· · · · · · This is Frank Angileri.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · I'll stop.
`
`·2· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· No, that's fine, I -- as long as
`
`·3· ·the court reporter can -- and I -- it's probably my
`
`·4· ·problem for not ending the sentence abruptly enough for
`
`·5· ·you.
`
`·6· · · · · · But anyway, let me talk to my panel here for a
`
`·7· ·second.
`
`·8· · · · · · I'm going to put everybody in -- on mute for one
`
`·9· ·second.
`
`10· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Your Honor, would you like for us
`
`11· ·to just read off the dates, the last set of dates that we
`
`12· ·offered so that you have them?
`
`13· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Yeah, that would help, actually.
`
`14· ·Yeah.
`
`15· · · · · · Why don't you do that, Ms. Gordnia?
`
`16· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Sure.
`
`17· · · · · · So the last dates we offered going from the due
`
`18· ·date 1 off and to due date 7 is March 30th for due
`
`19· ·date 1, June 22nd for due date 2, June 29th for due
`
`20· ·date 3, July 13th for due date 4, July 27th for due
`
`21· ·date 5, August 3rd for due date 6, and of course the
`
`22· ·Board will set due date 7 for the hearing.
`
`23· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· So you didn't really --
`
`24· ·okay.
`
`25· · · · · · Okay.· I see.· I think I understand.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · Let me just ask Mr. Angileri, then.
`
`·2· · · · · · Is that -- is -- was your main problem the 3/30
`
`·3· ·date -- I mean the 4/30 date?· I'm sorry.· The March 30th
`
`·4· ·date?
`
`·5· · · · · · What about the other five dates?
`
`·6· · · · · · Are those problems for you too, the offer that
`
`·7· ·aloud Ms. Gordnia just proposed?
`
`·8· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Mostly -- you know what,
`
`·9· ·Your Honor?
`
`10· · · · · · I think -- let me answer -- I think there were
`
`11· ·two questions.
`
`12· · · · · · So yes, the principal problem with the
`
`13· ·March 30 date, as I mentioned to Ms. Gordnia in the call
`
`14· ·that we had before, we have personal and professional
`
`15· ·conflicts that last through two months.· We have certain
`
`16· ·date deadlines in other cases, and those have been set a
`
`17· ·long time before we got involved, so there's a material
`
`18· ·difference for us been March 30 and April 7.
`
`19· · · · · · And then --
`
`20· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Let me just interrupt you
`
`21· ·again.
`
`22· · · · · · Ms. Gordnia, can you explain why that's a
`
`23· ·problem for you, the one-week difference, please?
`
`24· · · · · · How is that hurting the Petitioner?
`
`25· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· So just the setback.· The
`
`
`
`·1· ·Petitioner is being prejudiced just by the mere fact that
`
`·2· ·we're talking about pushing these schedules out by so
`
`·3· ·much, a month plus, almost, we're talking about here.
`
`·4· · · · · · So we're just in a position of trying to protect
`
`·5· ·our -- our client's interest here, and we -- we think
`
`·6· ·that this is a prejudice to -- to our -- our client.
`
`·7· · · · · · And also, we're getting less time for the oral
`
`·8· ·hearing if we push everything back.
`
`·9· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Okay.· I think I -- I
`
`10· ·see.
`
`11· · · · · · The -- the main prejudice is compressing the
`
`12· ·hearing schedule, then?
`
`13· · · · · · That's the only thing I've heard right now.
`
`14· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· And of course the fact that the
`
`15· ·Patent Owner is getting month -- a month plus time.
`
`16· · · · · · And also, we're -- now we have Board hearings in
`
`17· ·one -- in one where originally we had three on one date
`
`18· ·and one on another, so that's also something that
`
`19· ·we're -- we're losing here by having everything
`
`20· ·compressed into one hearing --
`
`21· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.
`
`22· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· -- and that happened because
`
`23· ·Chrimar asked the Board to change the hearing date.
`
`24· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.
`
`25· · · · · · Okay.· Thank you.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · Let me -- let me get back to my panel, and then
`
`·2· ·we'll discuss this for a little bit, and then we'll get
`
`·3· ·right back.· I'm going to put everybody on mute for a
`
`·4· ·second.· We'll be right back.
`
`·5· · · · · · (Pause in proceedings.)
`
`·6· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· We -- we've convened and
`
`·7· ·discussed the issue.
`
`·8· · · · · · We're going to split the baby with the bath
`
`·9· ·water, essentially, and give the date April 4th since you
`
`10· ·almost agreed.· We give you credit for that.· I hope that
`
`11· ·helps enough for Petitioner and Patent Owner.
`
`12· · · · · · And then I think what we'll do is we'll probably
`
`13· ·pick the later 8/31 date for the hearing because that
`
`14· ·way, it won't be as compressed for the Petitioner.
`
`15· · · · · · And that being said, I think -- we don't have
`
`16· ·any other issues unless -- well, I know there's a
`
`17· ·lingering -- we know there's a lingering joinder issue
`
`18· ·with Rutgers, but this almost seems like it may help the
`
`19· ·joinder issue, and the parties seem to agree that that's
`
`20· ·okay for joinder.
`
`21· · · · · · So I don't know.
`
`22· · · · · · Why don't we hear from Petitioner first, and
`
`23· ·then if there are any questions or any comments or any
`
`24· ·last things you want to throw -- throw in, we'll be happy
`
`25· ·to hear from you.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Your Honor, just for
`
`·2· ·clarification, the April 4th date we heard is the new due
`
`·3· ·date 1 for all four IPRs, but what is due date 2?
`
`·4· · · · · · Because essentially by moving that March 30th
`
`·5· ·deadline by a few days would compress the time for
`
`·6· ·Petitioner's reply, so we want to make that --
`
`·7· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Right.
`
`·8· · · · · · Why don't we -- that's a good point.
`
`·9· · · · · · I'm sorry to interrupt.
`
`10· · · · · · I meant to say that.
`
`11· · · · · · We should give you a little extra time.
`
`12· · · · · · So how much time do you need for that reply?
`
`13· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· So a week.
`
`14· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· And then would we --
`
`15· ·then -- I think you -- you -- with -- given this
`
`16· ·guidance, can you -- the parties work out the rest of
`
`17· ·this, or --
`
`18· · · · · · 'Cause I'm sure now they might want to push back
`
`19· ·a week or --
`
`20· · · · · · Patent Owner, is that okay?
`
`21· · · · · · Will due date three weeks from the added week,
`
`22· ·in other words, 6/29 would be now due date 2, so you
`
`23· ·would, what, want a week from that; is that correct,
`
`24· ·Patent Owner?
`
`25· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Yes, Your Honor.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · You're talking about the -- the difference
`
`·2· ·between due date 2 and due date 3 is one week?
`
`·3· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· I think that's what -- it should
`
`·4· ·be longer, actually, I guess.
`
`·5· · · · · · I think that's what Petitioner proposed.
`
`·6· · · · · · That's what I wrote down.
`
`·7· · · · · · I see you have a -- you have one, two -- three
`
`·8· ·weeks proposed there.
`
`·9· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· So Your Honor --
`
`10· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· I'm sorry.
`
`11· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Your Honor, to simplify things, it
`
`12· ·looks like the dates I read off before we went on hold
`
`13· ·were March 30th and June 22nd.
`
`14· · · · · · It sounds like the Board is adding five days to
`
`15· ·March 30th, so we would add that same amount to the
`
`16· ·June 22nd deadline, and we'd keep everything else the
`
`17· ·same.
`
`18· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Oh, so you would keep the
`
`19· ·July 14th date for due date 3 that Patent Owner proposed
`
`20· ·and --
`
`21· · · · · · 'Cause I think you -- you had offered a 6/29
`
`22· ·date, then.
`
`23· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· So -- so only as -- from the dates
`
`24· ·that I changed -- that I read, March 30th is being
`
`25· ·changed to April 5th, and due date 2 is being changed
`
`
`
`·1· ·from June 22nd to June 27th.
`
`·2· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Well, we changed it to
`
`·3· ·April 4th.· Wait.· I'm sorry.· April 4th.
`
`·4· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· April 4th.· Okay.· Oh, sorry.
`
`·5· ·April 4th.· That's my mistake.· So April 4th.
`
`·6· · · · · · And then we would add the same number of days,
`
`·7· ·and I'm just checking with a calendar here, so it's a
`
`·8· ·31 day -- March is a 31 day, so we're adding -- so we're
`
`·9· ·adding one, two, three, four -- five days to due date 1,
`
`10· ·making it April 4th, so we would add five days to due
`
`11· ·date 2, making it June 27th, and then everything else
`
`12· ·would stay -- and then everything else would stay the
`
`13· ·same, so due date 3 would be June 29th, due date 4 would
`
`14· ·be July 13th --
`
`15· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Wait a minute.
`
`16· · · · · · I think -- I have July 14th for due date 3.
`
`17· · · · · · Is that wrong?
`
`18· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· No, that's incorrect.
`
`19· · · · · · The dates that I originally read were --
`
`20· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Well, I mean I was going off of
`
`21· ·Patent Owner's proposal for --
`
`22· · · · · · Patent Owner, didn't you propose July 14th for
`
`23· ·due date 3 in your E-mail?
`
`24· · · · · · Did I have that wrong?
`
`25· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Your Honor, yes, we did.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Oh, okay.
`
`·2· · · · · · So then -- then the Board is starting with
`
`·3· ·the -- the deadline or the schedule proposed by the
`
`·4· ·Patent Owner as opposed to the one that we proposed prior
`
`·5· ·to going on hold?
`
`·6· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Correct.· Yeah.· That's right.
`
`·7· ·That's right, Ms. Gordnia.
`
`·8· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Okay.· And so just for the record,
`
`·9· ·we object to that because it's -- we think there is a
`
`10· ·significant prejudice to our client, the Petitioner, by
`
`11· ·moving the schedule so far -- pushing it so far back and
`
`12· ·giving Chrimar essentially a one-month advantage on their
`
`13· ·first response.
`
`14· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· On their first response,
`
`15· ·April 4th.
`
`16· · · · · · Okay.· Well, you would -- you would still have,
`
`17· ·what -- I guess you would still have almost two months
`
`18· ·for your reply.
`
`19· · · · · · Did you want more for your reply?
`
`20· · · · · · Is that the prejudice?
`
`21· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Well, that will be one way to
`
`22· ·address it.
`
`23· · · · · · So if we're making the first deadline April 4th,
`
`24· ·then -- then we could change the --
`
`25· · · · · · I mean we hadn't worked out these dates yet.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · We had worked out the dates that we had
`
`·2· ·proposed.
`
`·3· · · · · · So changing the schedule now --
`
`·4· · · · · · Can we just take a moment to look at just how
`
`·5· ·the dates would play out?
`
`·6· · · · · · It looks like --
`
`·7· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· I think that's fine.
`
`·8· · · · · · I think if we -- another thing we could do is
`
`·9· ·April 4th we start as a starting date, and then we pick
`
`10· ·8/31 as a hearing date.
`
`11· · · · · · It would seem to me the parties could work these
`
`12· ·out.· I don't see a lot of prejudice, to tell you the
`
`13· ·truth, to Petitioner, and if there is, I think you should
`
`14· ·work that out and get however much time you need for your
`
`15· ·reply, and Patent Owner can get their time that they
`
`16· ·need.
`
`17· · · · · · It's just -- I don't want to get involved in too
`
`18· ·much of the nitty-gritty details of working out the
`
`19· ·schedule right now.· You know, if we can help you set
`
`20· ·constraints -- I really don't -- the panel doesn't feel a
`
`21· ·lot of prejudice to Petitioner, especially when you --
`
`22· ·you know, I think you mentioned the compression of the
`
`23· ·schedule up to the hearing date was a big deal, but you
`
`24· ·know, most of these hearings are getting pushed back to
`
`25· ·8/31 from August 8th.· There's only one being moved up.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · So why don't we do that.
`
`·2· · · · · · Let's -- hang on one second.
`
`·3· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Well --
`
`·4· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Go ahead.· Go ahead, Ms. --
`
`·5· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· No.
`
`·6· · · · · · I was just going to say if we're going to work
`
`·7· ·out the rest of the dates, at a minimum, I would
`
`·8· ·appreciate it very much, Your Honor, if you would set the
`
`·9· ·reply date.
`
`10· · · · · · So we -- I think we started this conversation
`
`11· ·just a few minutes ago after the hold that we would want
`
`12· ·an extra week, so why don't we just go with that.· If
`
`13· ·April 4th is the response date, then let's add a week to
`
`14· ·the -- to the current due date 2 --
`
`15· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· So --
`
`16· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· -- the 23rd, and we'd add a week
`
`17· ·to it.
`
`18· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· June 30th.
`
`19· · · · · · Is that -- does that work out for you, Patent
`
`20· ·Owner?
`
`21· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Sure.· No problem, Your Honor.
`
`22· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`23· · · · · · So then we'll keep the other dates, July 14th,
`
`24· ·July 28th, August 11th, August 18th?
`
`25· · · · · · Is that due dates 3 through 6?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Yes.
`
`·2· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Great.
`
`·3· · · · · · Okay.· That makes life easy for everyone.
`
`·4· · · · · · I appreciate you working that out.
`
`·5· · · · · · Hang on one second.
`
`·6· · · · · · Let me just check with the panel and see if
`
`·7· ·there are any other issues.
`
`·8· · · · · · (Pause in proceedings.)
`
`·9· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Looks like -- I think we
`
`10· ·can wrap this up.
`
`11· · · · · · Unless there are any other questions, we'll have
`
`12· ·whoever hired the -- the court reporter file the
`
`13· ·transcript in all the cases, of course.
`
`14· · · · · · And then Petitioner, Ms. Gordnia, do you have
`
`15· ·anything else you want to discuss?
`
`16· · · · · · Mr. Fleming?
`
`17· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· Not at this time, Your Honor.
`
`18· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.
`
`19· · · · · · MR. FLEMING:· Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`20· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Thank you.
`
`21· · · · · · How about you, Mr. Angileri?
`
`22· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· No, Your Honor.
`
`23· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.
`
`24· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Will the Board be issuing a
`
`25· ·schedule on those dates that we just described?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· No.
`
`·2· · · · · · Can -- why don't we have -- can the parties just
`
`·3· ·file a stipulation to all this?
`
`·4· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Yes.
`
`·5· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Do you have the dates?
`
`·6· · · · · · Do you want me to read them that we agreed to
`
`·7· ·again or --
`
`·8· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Let me just -- would you, yes,
`
`·9· ·please read them.
`
`10· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· This is what I -- okay.
`
`11· ·We'll -- we'll -- we'll go through them, make sure we're
`
`12· ·all on the same page.
`
`13· · · · · · Due date 1, I have April 4th, due date 2,
`
`14· ·June 30th, due date 3, July 14th, due date 4, July 28th,
`
`15· ·due date 5, August 11th, due date 6, August 18th, and
`
`16· ·then due date 7, probably 8/31.· I'm pretty sure we --
`
`17· ·the panel looked at that, but we got to double-check to
`
`18· ·make sure that it's open that day.· I didn't check that
`
`19· ·yet.· But the earliest the hearing would be would be 8/24
`
`20· ·if we don't get the 8/31, but we're going to try to do
`
`21· ·the 8/31.
`
`22· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`23· · · · · · And this is Frank Angileri.
`
`24· · · · · · I have one other point.
`
`25· · · · · · You had asked about the joinder.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · On the Patent Owner's side, we just filed today,
`
`·2· ·without opposition to those, based on the statement, the
`
`·3· ·representation that they were going to be sort of, you
`
`·4· ·know, in the background, if you will.
`
`·5· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Correct.
`
`·6· · · · · · Okay.· I -- we -- we saw those motions, and I
`
`·7· ·appreciate your reminding us of those, and I appreciate
`
`·8· ·the working out with that.
`
`·9· · · · · · I think with the schedule, it actually might
`
`10· ·help for the joinder to happen, but those dates are
`
`11· ·pretty far out, from what I understand.· I think -- I
`
`12· ·think, if I'm not mistaken, it's 5/11 is when the
`
`13· ·preliminary response is due.
`
`14· · · · · · Is that right?
`
`15· · · · · · I think so.
`
`16· · · · · · Hang on.
`
`17· · · · · · Yeah.
`
`18· · · · · · 5/8, I think the preliminary response is due.
`
`19· · · · · · So yeah, they would be -- if they did get
`
`20· ·joined -- if they were to be joined, then they would
`
`21· ·definitely probably be in the back seat somewhere because
`
`22· ·it doesn't look like that much time to add anything.· You
`
`23· ·will be already well into your reply by then or almost
`
`24· ·into your reply, so -- or Petitioner will, I should say.
`
`25· · · · · · But we'll -- we'll work -- we'll look at that
`
`
`
`·1· ·when we get to it, but it's worth looking into a little
`
`·2· ·bit now.
`
`·3· · · · · · Okay.· Ms. Gordnia, did you want to add
`
`·4· ·anything?
`
`·5· · · · · · MS. GORDNIA:· No, Your Honor.
`
`·6· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· Okay.· Well, thank you everyone.
`
`·7· · · · · · We're adjourned.
`
`·8· · · · · · MR. ANGILERI:· Thank you.
`
`·9· · · · · · JUDGE EASTHOM:· And we'll wait for you to send
`
`10· ·in the transcript and then the stipulated revised order
`
`11· ·here.
`
`12· · · · · · Don't -- do