`
`Paper: 40
`Entered: May 15, 2018
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`KAWASAKI RAIL CAR, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SCOTT BLAIR,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01036
`Patent 6,700,602 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, SCOTT A. DANIELS, and
`KEVIN C. TROCK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`DANIELS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01036
`Patent 6,700,602 B1
`
`
`
`Pursuant to our Order on May 3, 2018, the parties provided to the
`Board, by email on May 10, 2018, a proposed schedule to address the newly
`instituted grounds in this proceeding. Paper 38. The proposed schedule
`assumed an extension of the statutory due date, presumably under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.100(c), and a new Oral Hearing date of December 19, 2018. In light of
`the approaching June 5, 2018 Oral Hearing date in this proceeding, the
`Board conducted a telephone conference with Petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Mark
`Chapman and Mr. Armin Ghiam, as well as Patent Owner’s counsel, Ms.
`Jennifer Meredith, on May 14, 2018, to discuss the schedule.
`The Board informed the parties during the call that the statutory due
`date in this proceeding would not be extended because the newly instituted
`grounds consisted of either, or both, the substitution of Miyajima for
`Namikawa as a primary reference, and the substitution of JTOA Magazine
`as a secondary reference for Sasao. See Pet. 6–7. The Board explained that
`the technical subject matter of the two additional references relevant to the
`newly instituted grounds was not so disparate as to impose an unreasonable
`burden on either party to address the added grounds, particularly where the
`Board is willing to change the Oral Hearing date in this proceeding. In that
`regard, we note further that in related Case IPR2017-00117, Patent Owner
`already has, in a preliminary response (Paper 6), addressed Miyajima
`applied as a primary reference against independent claim 1 of the patent
`involved in this proceeding, and JTOA Magazine applied as a secondary
`reference against independent claim 1 of the patent involved in this
`proceeding.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01036
`Patent 6,700,602 B1
`
`
`The Board also asked the parties’ counsel if they would consider
`waiving the newly instituted grounds. Both Mr. Chapman and Ms. Meredith
`indicated that this was a possibility, and Petitioner requested two days, due
`to the time difference, to contact their overseas client to discuss the matter.
`The Board requested that Mr. Chapman meet and confer with Patent
`Owner’s counsel, then send an email to the Board as soon as they had an
`answer from their client with respect to such a waiver.
`We indicated that in the event that the parties are not able to agree to
`waive the newly instituted grounds, the Board could move the Oral Hearing
`date to the week of July 9, to accommodate a Supplemental Patent Owner’s
`Response and Supplemental Petitioner’s Reply as well as respective cross-
`examination of any witnesses. Because the parties’ counsel were unable to
`agree on intervening dates for their respective supplemental briefs during the
`call, the Board set June 8, 2018 as the date for Patent Owner’s Supplemental
`Response in the event there is no agreement to waive the newly instituted
`grounds. The Board noted also that the parties’ supplemental briefs must be
`limited to the newly instituted grounds in this proceeding.
`As set forth above, the parties shall meet and confer and inform the
`Board by email no later than May 17, 2018 whether they will file a joint
`motion to waive the newly instituted grounds. If not, based on the June 8,
`2018 due date for the Supplemental Patent Owner’s Response, the parties
`will propose in their email to the Board, a reasonable schedule, given the
`two alternative references and new grounds, in which each party can
`accomplish their briefing, any additional cross-examinations, and any
`Motions for Observation by July 5, 2018. In either event, the parties shall
`also provide two alternative dates and times during the week of May 21–25,
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01036
`Patent 6,700,602 B1
`
`2018, for a telephone conference with the Board to finalize the schedule in
`this proceeding.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Supplemental Response is limited to
`the newly instituted grounds and must be filed no later than June 8, 2018;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer as to
`waiver of the newly instituted grounds, and inform the Board by email no
`later than May 17, 2018 whether they will file a joint motion to waive the
`newly instituted grounds;
`FURTHER ORDERED that should Petitioner and Patent Owner not
`agree to file a joint motion to waive the newly instituted grounds, the parties
`will propose in their email to the Board a schedule in which each party can
`accomplish their briefing, any additional cross-examinations, and any
`Motions for Observation, by July 5, 2018; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall provide also in the email
`to the Board two alternative dates and times during the week of May 21–25,
`2018, for a telephone conference with the Board to finalize the schedule in
`this proceeding.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01036
`Patent 6,700,602 B1
`
`For PETITIONER:
`ANDREWS KURTH KENYON LLP
`Sheila Mortazavi
`Mark A. Chapman
`Zaed M. Billah
`Armin Ghiam
`SheilaMortazavi@andrewskurthkenyon.com
`MChapman@HuntonAK.com
`ZBillah@HuntonAK.com
`AGhiam@HuntonAK.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`MEREDITH & KEYHANI, PLLC
`Jennifer Meredith
`Sucheta Chitgopekar
`jmeredith@meredithkeyhani.com
`sucheta@meredithkeyhani.com
`
`5
`
`
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
