`
`IPR2016-00948, Paper No. 36
`IPR2016-00949, Paper No. 37
`June 23, 2017
`571-272-7822
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______
`
`VALVE CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______
`
`IPR2016-00948 (Patent 8,641,525 B2)
`IPR2016-00949 (Patent 9,089,770 B2)
`_______
`
`RECORD OF ORAL HEARING
`Oral Hearing Held: Monday, June 5, 2017
`
`Before PHILLIP J. KAUFFMAN, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, and
`MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Monday, June
`5, 2017, at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 600 Dulany
`Street, Alexandria, Virginia, in Courtroom B, at 1:00 p.m.
`
`IRONBURG EX2031, Page 1
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00948 (Patent 8,641,525 B2)
`IPR2016-00949 (Patent 9,089,770 B2)
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER, VALVE CORPORATION:
`
`JOSHUA C. HARRISON, ESQUIRE
`REYNALDO BARCELO, ESQUIRE
`BARCELO, HARRISON & WALKER, LLP
`2901 West Coast Highway
`Suite 200
`Newport Beach, California 92663
`(949) 340-9736
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER, IRONBURG
`INVENTIONS LTD.:
`
`EHAB SAMUEL, ESQUIRE
`YASSER M. EL-GAMAL, ESQUIRE
`MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
`695 Town Center Drive
`Fourteenth Floor
`Costa Mesa, California 92626
`(714) 338-2740
`
`2
`
`IRONBURG EX2031, Page 2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00948 (Patent 8,641,525 B2)
`IPR2016-00949 (Patent 9,089,770 B2)
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`scope of reply, you'll see that that case cites to 37 C.F.R.
`42.23(b), which expressly says that the proper scope of reply
`includes what's in their Patent Owner's response.
` And so not only is the subclass and class on the
`face of the very patents that have been in evidence the
`entire case, but in addition to that, it's responsive to
`their Patent Owner's response.
` Can I have the next slide, please?
` The second issue that I would like to address
`that's disputed is this business about the preamble not being
`limiting and so forth. Our argument isn't that the word,
`Hand-held, appears in the preamble, but it's because it's in
`the preamble, it's not limiting. That is not our argument.
`It's almost a tempest in a teapot.
` We're kind of scratching our heads as to they're
`worried about that. We're fine with the preamble being
`limiting. The word, Hand-held, though, covers an actual
`thing in Tosaki called handgrips 14A. Tosaki actually
`says -- excuse me -- first thing -- I just want to grab
`Tosaki.
` JUDGE KAUFFMAN: For the record, we're talking
`about Slide 3 of the Petitioner's demonstratives?
`
`65
`
`IRONBURG EX2031, Page 3
`
`