`571.272.7822
`
`
`Paper No. 10
` Date: January 17, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION and DENSO CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before KRISTEN L. DROESCH, JOHN A. HUDALLA, and
`AMANDA F. WIEKER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`DROESCH, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`A. DUE DATES
`
`This order sets due dates for the parties to take action after institution
`of the proceeding. The parties may stipulate to different dates for DUE
`DATES 1 through 5 (earlier or later, but no later than DUE DATE 6). A
`notice of the stipulation, specifically identifying the changed due dates, must
`be promptly filed. The parties may not stipulate to an extension of DUE
`DATES 6 and 7, nor does stipulating to a different DUE DATE 4 modify the
`deadline, set in this Order, for requesting oral argument.
`In stipulating to different times, the parties should consider the effect
`of the stipulation on times to object to evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)), to
`supplement evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)), to conduct cross-
`examination (37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2)), and to draft papers depending on the
`evidence and cross-examination testimony (see section B, below).
`The parties are reminded that the Testimony Guidelines appended to
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,772
`(Aug. 14, 2012) (Appendix D), apply to this proceeding. The Board may
`impose an appropriate sanction for failure to adhere to the Testimony
`Guidelines. 37 C.F.R. § 42.12. For example, reasonable expenses and
`attorneys’ fees incurred by any party may be levied on a person who
`impedes, delays, or frustrates the fair examination of a witness.
`
`1. INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL
`
`The parties are directed to contact the Board within a month of this
`decision if there is a need to discuss proposed changes to this Scheduling
`Order or proposed motions. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed.
`Reg. at 48,765–66 (guidance in preparing for an initial conference call).
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`2. DUE DATE 1
`
`The patent owner may file—
`a.
`A response to the petition (37 C.F.R. § 42.120), and
`b.
`A motion to amend the patent (37 C.F.R. § 42.121).
`The patent owner must file any such response or motion to amend by DUE
`DATE 1. See section C, below. If the patent owner elects not to file
`anything, the patent owner must arrange a conference call with the parties
`and the Board. The patent owner is cautioned that any arguments for
`patentability not raised in the response will be deemed waived.
`
`3. DUE DATE 2
`
`The petitioner must file any reply to the patent owner’s response and
`opposition to the motion to amend by DUE DATE 2.
`
`4. DUE DATE 31
`
`The patent owner must file any reply to the petitioner’s opposition to
`patent owner’s motion to amend by DUE DATE 3.
`
`5. DUE DATE 4
`
`Each party must file any motion for an observation on the
`a.
`cross-examination testimony of a reply witness (see section C, below) by
`DUE DATE 4.
`
`
`1 Please be advised that, if no Motion to Amend is filed, Due Date 3 is moot
`and the panel may advance Due Dates 4–7 sua sponte.
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`
`Each party must file any motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R
`b.
`§ 42.64(c)) and any request for oral argument (37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a)) by
`DUE DATE 4.
`
`6. DUE DATE 5
`
`Each party must file any response to an observation on cross-
`a.
`examination testimony by DUE DATE 5.
`b.
`Each party must file any opposition to a motion to exclude
`evidence by DUE DATE 5.
`
`7. DUE DATE 6
`
`Each party must file any reply for a motion to exclude evidence by
`DUE DATE 6.
`
`8. DUE DATE 7
`
`The oral argument (if requested by either party) is set for DUE
`DATE 7.
`
`B. CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`Except as the parties might otherwise agree, for each due date—
`1.
`Cross-examination begins after any supplemental evidence is
`due. 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2).
`2.
`Cross-examination ends no later than a week before the filing
`date for any paper in which the cross-examination testimony is expected to
`be used. Id.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`C. MOTION FOR OBSERVATION ON CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`A motion for observation on cross-examination provides the parties
`with a mechanism to draw the Board’s attention to relevant cross-
`examination testimony of a reply witness because no further substantive
`paper is permitted after the reply. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide,
`77 Fed. Reg. at 48,767–68. The observation must be a concise statement of
`the relevance of precisely identified testimony to a precisely identified
`argument or portion of an exhibit. Each observation should not exceed a
`single, short paragraph. The opposing party may respond to the observation.
`Any response must be equally concise and specific.
`
`D. MOTION TO AMEND
`
`Patent Owner may file a motion to amend without prior authorization
`from the Board. Nevertheless, Patent Owner must confer with the Board
`before filing such a motion. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a). Patent Owner
`should arrange for a conference call with the Board and opposing counsel at
`least ten (10) business days before DUE DATE 1 in order to satisfy the
`requirement for a conference.
`
`E. PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`No protective order has been entered in either proceeding. The parties
`are reminded of the requirement for a protective order when filing a motion
`to seal. 37 C.F.R. § 42.54. If the parties have agreed to a proposed
`protective order, including the Default Standing Protective Order, Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, App. B (Aug 14, 2012),
`they should file a signed copy of the proposed protective order with the
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`motion to seal. If the parties choose to propose a protective order or orders
`other than, or departing from, the Default Standing Protective Order, they
`must submit a joint, proposed protective order or orders, accompanied by a
`red-lined version based on the Default Standing Protective Order.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL .............................................. Upon Request
`DUE DATE 1 .............................................................................. April 9, 2018
`Patent owner’s response to the petition
`Patent owner’s motion to amend the patent
`DUE DATE 2 ................................................................................ July 2, 2018
`Petitioner’s reply to patent owner’s response to petition
`Petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`DUE DATE 3 .............................................................................. July 26, 2018
`Patent owner’s reply to petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`DUE DATE 4 ......................................................................... August 13, 2018
`Motion for observation regarding cross-examination of reply witness
`Motion to exclude evidence
`Request for oral argument
`DUE DATE 5 ........................................................................ August 27, 2018
`Response to observation
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`DUE DATE 6 ..................................................................... September 6, 2018
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`DUE DATE 7 ................................................................... September 12, 2018
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01497
`Patent 7,067,952 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Joshua L. Goldberg
`James R. Barney
`Thomas W. Winland
`Tyler M. Akagi
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
`joshua.goldberg@finnegan.com
`james.barney@finnegan.com
`tom.winland@finnegan.com
`tyler.akagi@finnegan.com
`
`Paul R. Steadman
`Matthew D. Satchwell
`DLA PIPER LLP (US)
`paul.steadman@dlapiper.com
`matthew.satchwell@dlapiper.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`William Meunier
`Michael T. Renaud
`Daniel B. Weinger
`Serge Subach
`Brad M. Scheller
`MINTZ, LEVIN, COHEN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C.
`wameunier@mintz.com
`mtrenaud@mintz.com
`dbweinger@mintz.com
`ssubach@mintz.com
`bmscheller@mintz.com
`
`Tim R. Seeley
`James R. Hietala
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES
`tim@intven.com
`jhietala@intven.com
`
`
`
`8
`
`