`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_______________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`REALTIME DATA, LLC D/B/A/ IXO,
`Patent Owner
`
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-01737
`Patent 8,880,862
`
`_______________
`
`
`PATENT OWNER REALTIME DATA, LLC D/B/A IXO’S
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-01737
`U.S. Patent No. 8,880,862
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 and the October 24, 2017 Order (Paper 34)
`
`setting Oral Argument for January 8, 2018, Patent Owner Realtime Data, LLC
`
`d/b/a IXO hereby requests that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board hear oral
`
`argument on the following issues:
`
`1) Whether Petitioner Apple Inc. has met its burden of proving claims 1-4,
`
`6-7, 13, 23-34, 47-58, 83-96, 99-100, 105-111, 113, and 116 of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,880,862 (“the ‘862 Patent”) are unpatentable under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 103(a) over U.S. Patent No. 5,860,083 (“Sukegawa”) and U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,145,069 (“Dye”);
`
`2) Whether Petitioner has met its burden of proving claims 1-4, 6-7, 13, 23-
`
`34, 47-58, 83-96, 99-100, 105-111, 113, and 116 the ‘862 Patent are
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Sukegawa, Dye, and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,374,353 (“Settsu”);
`
`3) Whether Petitioner has met its burden of proving claims 1-4, 6-7, 13, 23-
`
`34, 47-58, 83-96, 99-100, 105-111, 113, and 116 of the ‘862 Patent are
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Sukegawa, Dye, and
`
`Michael Burrows et al., On-line Data Compression in a Log-structured
`
`File System (1992) (“Burrows”);
`
`4) Whether Petitioner has met its burden of proving claims 1-4, 6-7, 13, 23-
`
`34, 47-58, 83-96, 99-100, 105-111, 113, and 116 of the ‘862 Patent are
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-01737
`U.S. Patent No. 8,880,862
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Sukegawa, Dye, Settsu,
`
`and Burrows;
`
`5) Whether Petitioner has met its burden of proving claims 1-4, 6-7, 13, 23-
`
`34, 47-58, 83-96, 99-100, 105-111, 113, and 116 of the ‘862 Patent are
`
`unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of Sukegawa, Dye, and
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,317,818 (“Zwiegincew”)1;
`
`
`
`1 The Petition identifies Sukegawa, Dye, and Zwiegincew as the references relied
`
`upon for Ground 5. See Petition at 3. Indeed, the Board initially identified
`
`Sukegawa, Dye, and Zwiegincew as the asserted prior art at issue in Ground 5; but
`
`later identified those three references, plus Settsu, as the fifth instituted ground. See
`
`Paper 7, Institution Decision at 5, 24 (Mar. 14, 2017). Also, in the related
`
`IPR2016-01738 proceeding, Apple identifies Sukegawa, Dye and Zwiegincew as
`
`Ground 5 and the Board instituted on those three references without Settsu. See
`
`IPR2016-01738, Paper 7 at 28 (Mar. 20, 2017). Patent Owner therefore
`
`respectfully requests that Ground 5 be limited to consideration of Sukegawa, Dye,
`
`and Zwiegincew.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-01737
`U.S. Patent No. 8,880,862
`
`
`6) Whether to grant Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 316(d) with respect to contingent substitute claims 118-173 in the event
`
`that the Board finds independent claims 1, 6, and/or 13 unpatentable;
`
`7) Whether Petitioner’s Exhibits 1038 and 1040 should be excluded from
`
`evidence;
`
`8) Any subsidiary issue relevant to issues (1) to (7), including, without
`
`limitation, claim construction, assessment of evidence, and admissibility
`
`of evidence; and
`
`9) Any other issues the Board deems necessary for issuing a final written
`
`decision.
`
`Patent Owner also respectfully requests the ability to use audio visual
`
`equipment to display demonstrative exhibits, including the use of a projector and
`
`screen that connects to a laptop computer. Patent Owner also requests that an
`
`ELMO-type projector be made available for use.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`Date: December 8, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-01737
`U.S. Patent No. 8,880,862
`
`
`
`
` /Joseph F. Edell/
`Joseph F. Edell (Reg. No. 67,625)
`Richard Z. Zhang (Reg. No. 73,397)
`Fisch Sigler LLP
`5301 Wisconsin Avenue NW
`Fourth Floor
`Washington, DC 20015
`Phone: (202) 362-3527
`Fax: (202) 362-3501
`Email: Joe.Edell.IPR@fischllp.com
`Email: Richard.Zhang.IPR@fischllp.com
`
`Desmond S. Jui (pro vac vice)
`Fisch Sigler LLP
`96 North Third Street
`Suite 260
`San Jose, CA 95112
`Phone: (650) 362-8209
`Email: Desmond.Jui.IPR@fischllp.com
`
`William P. Rothwell (Reg. No. 75,522)
`Noroozi PC
`2245 Texas Drive, Suite 300
`Sugar Land, TX 77479
`Phone: (281) 566-2685
`Email: William@noroozipc.com
`
`Kayvan B. Noroozi (pro hac vice)
`Noroozi PC
`1299 Ocean Avenue, Suite 450
`Santa Monica, CA 90401
`Phone: (310) 975-7074
`Email: Kayvan@noroozipc.com
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-01737
`U.S. Patent No. 8,880,862
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on December 8, 2017, a true and correct copy of the
`
`foregoing Patent Owner’s Request for Oral Argument is being served
`
`electronically to the Petitioner at the correspondence email addresses of record
`
`provided in the Petition as follows:
`
`W. Karl Renner (Lead Counsel) IPR39521-0025IP1@fr.com
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`Date: December 8, 2017
`
`
`
` /Joseph F. Edell/
`Joseph F. Edell (Reg. No. 67,625)
`Fisch Sigler LLP
`5301 Wisconsin Avenue NW
`Fourth Floor
`Washington, DC 20015
`Phone: (202) 362-3527
`Fax: (202) 362-3501
`Email: Joe.Edell.IPR@fischllp.com
`
`
`
`
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
