`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 14
`Entered: November 26, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FALL LINE PATENTS, LLC
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00043
`Patent 9,454,748 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before MICHELLE N. WORMMEESTER, SHEILA F. McSHANE, and
`JOHN R. KENNY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KENNY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Requests for Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`The date set for a requested oral hearing in this proceeding is
`December 14, 2018. Paper 7. Both parties request, and we grant, an oral
`hearing. Papers 11, 13.
`Each side will have 60 minutes, total, to present its arguments.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s claims at
`issue in this review are unpatentable. Accordingly, Petitioner will open the
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00043
`Patent 9,454,748 B2
`
`hearing by presenting its case regarding the challenged claims for which the
`Board instituted trial. After Petitioner’s presentation, Patent Owner will
`respond to Petitioner’s argument. Petitioner may reserve time to respond to
`Patent Owner’s argument.
`The hearing will commence at 1 p.m. Eastern Time on December 14,
`2018, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street,
`Alexandria, Virginia. The Board will provide a court reporter for the
`hearing and the reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the
`hearing. At least one member of the panel may be attending the oral
`argument remotely by use of two-way audio-visual communication
`equipment. The hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance
`that will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. If the parties
`have any concern about disclosing confidential information, they are
`requested to contact the Board at least 10 days in advance of the hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`At the hearing, each party may only rely upon evidence that was
`properly, previously submitted in the proceeding. Further, each party may
`only present arguments that were properly, previously presented in the
`papers in this proceeding. No new evidence or arguments may be presented
`at the hearing. See Paper 7, 3 (“any arguments for patentability not raised in
`the response will be deemed waived”) (emphasis omitted).
`The parties are reminded that, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(7), a
`proponent of deposition testimony must file such testimony as an exhibit.
`The Board will not consider any deposition testimony that has not been so
`filed. Furthermore, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must
`be served at least seven business days before the hearing date. The parties
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00043
`Patent 9,454,748 B2
`
`shall meet and confer to discuss and resolve any objections to demonstrative
`exhibits.
`Any party with unresolved objections to demonstrative exhibits must
`file a list of those objections with the Board at least two business days before
`the hearing. For each objection, the list must identify with particularity
`which portions of the demonstrative exhibits are subject to the objection and
`may include a short, one-sentence statement explaining the objection. No
`argument or further explanation is permitted. The Board will consider any
`objections and may schedule a conference call if deemed necessary.
`Otherwise, we may consider the objections at or after the hearing. Any
`objection to demonstrative exhibits not timely presented may be considered
`waived.
`Notwithstanding 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), each party also shall file its
`demonstrative exhibits with the Board as a separate paper at least two
`business days prior to the hearing. A hard copy of the demonstratives
`should be provided to the court reporter at the hearing, but hard copies of the
`demonstratives are not needed for the judges.
`The parties are directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc.
`v. The Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041
`(PTAB January 27, 2015) (Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate
`content of demonstrative exhibits. Demonstrative exhibits are not evidence
`and may not introduce new evidence or arguments. Instead, demonstrative
`exhibits should cite to evidence in the record. The parties are reminded that
`the presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative
`exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to
`ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00043
`Patent 9,454,748 B2
`
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. However, any counsel of record may present the party’s
`argument. If either party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending
`the oral argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference
`with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`Any special requests for audio-visual equipment should be directed to
`Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be honored
`unless presented in a separate communication not less than five days before
`the hearing directed to the above email address.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00043
`Patent 9,454,748 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David W. O’Brien
`Raghav Bajaj
`David L. McCombs
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.obrien.ipr@haynesboone.com
`raghav.bajaj.ipr@haynesboone.com
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`Roshan Mansinghani
`Jonathan Stroud
`Jonathan R. Bowser
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`roshan@unifiedpatents.com
`jonathan@unifiedpatents.com
`jbowser@unifiedpatents.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Terry L. Watt
`CROWE & DUNLEVY
`terry.watt@crowedunlevy.com
`
`Matthew J. Antonelli
`Michael E. Ellis
`Larry D. Thompson, Jr.
`ANTONELLI, HARRINGTON & THOMPSON LLP
`matt@ahtlawfirm.com
`michael@ahtlawfirm.com
`larry@ahlawfirm.com
`
`
`5
`
`