`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 8
`Entered: May 21, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, JOHN F. HORVATH, and
`SEAN P. O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`A. DUE DATES
`
`This Order sets forth 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).
`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.
`
`If the parties stipulate to different due dates, notice of the stipulation
`specifically identifying the changed due dates must be promptly filed. 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.
`
`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. 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).
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`The patent owner must file any such response or motion to amend by DUE
`DATE 1. 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.
`
`2. 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.
`
`3. DUE DATE 3
`
`The patent owner must file any reply to the petitioner’s opposition to
`patent owner’s motion to amend by DUE DATE 3.
`
`4. DUE DATE 4
`
`a. Each party must file any motion for an observation on the cross-
`examination testimony of a reply witness by DUE DATE 4.
`
`b. Each party must file any motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R
`§ 42.64(c)) by DUE DATE 4.
`
`c. Each party must file any request for oral argument (37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.70(a)) by DUE DATE 4.
`
`5. DUE DATE 5
`
`a. Each party must file any response to an observation on cross-
`examination testimony by DUE DATE 5.
`
`b. Each party must file any opposition to a motion to exclude
`evidence by DUE DATE 5.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`6. DUE DATE 6
`
`Each party must file any reply for a motion to exclude evidence by
`DUE DATE 6.
`
`7. DUE DATE 7
`
`Oral argument (if requested by either party) is set for DUE DATE 7.
`
`B. INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL
`
`The parties are directed to contact the Board within one month of this
`Order if there is a need to discuss proposed changes to this Order or
`proposed motions. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`48,756, 48,765–66 (Aug. 14, 2012) (guidance in preparing for an initial
`conference call).
`
`C. CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`Except as the parties might otherwise agree, for each due date—
`
`a. Cross-examination begins after any supplemental evidence is due.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2).
`
`b. 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.
`
`D. 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
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`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.
`
`E. MOTION TO AMEND
`
`Although the filing of a Motion to Amend is authorized under our
`Rules, the patent owner must confer with the Board before filing any Motion
`to Amend. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a). The 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.
`
`F. PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`No protective order has been entered in this 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
`motion to seal. If the parties choose to propose a protective order other than,
`or departing from, the Default Standing Protective Order, they must submit a
`joint, proposed protective order, accompanied by a red-lined version based
`on the Default Standing Protective Order.
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL ............................................... Upon Request
`DUE DATE 1 ............................................................................ August 8, 2018
`
`Patent owner’s response to the petition
`
`Patent owner’s motion to amend the patent
`DUE DATE 2 ........................................................................ October 29, 2018
`
`Petitioner’s reply to patent owner’s response to petition
`
`Petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`DUE DATE 3 .................................................................... November 29, 2018
`
`Patent owner’s reply to petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`DUE DATE 4 ..................................................................... December 20, 2018
`
`Motion for observation regarding cross-examination of reply witness
`
`Motion to exclude evidence
`
`Request for oral argument
`DUE DATE 5 ........................................................................... January 3, 2019
`
`Response to observation
`
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`DUE DATE 6 ......................................................................... January 10, 2019
`
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`DUE DATE 7 ......................................................................... January 23, 2019
`
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00294
`Patent 6,736,759 B1
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Adam P. Seitz
`Paul R. Hart
`Chris R. Schmidt
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`adam.seitz@eriseip.com
`paul.hart@eriseip.com
`chris.schmidt@eriseip.com
`ptab@eriseip.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Ryan Loveless
`Brett Mangrum
`James Etheridge
`Jeffrey Huang
`Etheridge Law Group
`ryan@etheridgelaw.com
`brett@etheridgelaw.com
`jim@etheridgelaw.com
`jeff@etheridgelaw.com
`
`Sean D. Burdick
`Uniloc USA, Inc.
`sean.burdick@unilocusa.com
`
`7
`
`