`_____________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________________________
`
`VIZIO, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`NICHIA CORPORATION
` Patent Owner.
`______________________________
`Case IPR 2017-01608
`Case IPR 2017-01623
`Patent No. 8,530,250 B2
`Teleconference before:
`JUDGES BRIAN J. McNAMARA, STACEY G. WHITE, and
`BRENT M. DOUGAL
`Wednesday, February 28, 2018
`12:57 p.m.
`
`Job No.: 179923
`Pages: 1 - 38
`Reported by: Gail A. Reed, CSR, RMR, CRR
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`NICHIA EXHIBIT 2007
`Vizio, Inc. v. Nichia Corporation
`Case IPR2018-00437
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`2
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`GABRIELLE E. HIGGINS, ESQUIRE
`KATHRYN N. HONG, ESQUIRE
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`3 Embarcadero Center
`San Francisco, California 94111
`415.315.6300
`
`ON BEHALF OF PATENT OWNER:
`MARTIN ZOLTICK, ESQUIRE
`MICHAEL JONES, ESQUIRE
`ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C.
`607 14TH Street, NW
`Suite 800
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`202.783.6040
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`3
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Good afternoon,
`everyone. This is Judge McNamara. I'm on
`the line. Judge Dougal and Judge White are
`also on the line.
` Is anyone on the line for the
`Petitioner?
` MS. HIGGINS: Yes, your Honor.
`This is Gabrielle Higgins and Kathryn Hong on
`behalf of Petitioner. Petitioner singular.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: All right. That's
`Petitioner Vizio; is that right?
` MS. HIGGINS: Yes.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. And how
`about for the Patent Owner?
` MR. ZOLTICK: Yes. For the Patent
`Owner, your Honor, Marty Zoltick and my
`colleague, Michael Jones.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. And I
`understand we have a Court Reporter on the
`line; is that right?
` THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, sir. My
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`4
`
`name is Gail Reed.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: All right. And as
`I said, Judge Dougal and Judge White are on
`the line, so we are prepared to begin.
` I think it was the Patent Owner who
`requested this conference; is that right?
` MR. ZOLTICK: Yes, your Honor.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Well, why
`don't you begin then.
` MR. ZOLTICK: Sure. So we
`requested the conference call to address two
`matters. The first one was proposed change
`to the scheduling orders.
` And the second matter was
`authorization -- seeking authorization to
`file a Motion for Additional Discovery
`directed to the real party-in-interest issue.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Let me -- let me
`interrupt you for just a second because I
`might be able to short-circuit the discussion
`on the change to the scheduling order.
` We have -- the panel has reviewed the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`5
`
`circumstances, and we are not currently in a
`position to change the date of the final
`hearing of the trial hearing --
` MR. ZOLTICK: Okay.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: -- which I think
`is part of your proposal. So to the extent
`that you might want to go back and rethink or
`revisit your conversations with each other
`about that, you might want to do that and get
`back to us with another proposal. But as I
`said, right now, we're not in a position to
`change the hearing date.
` MR. ZOLTICK: No. I understand the
`situation.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Yeah, they get
`scheduled a long time out.
` MR. ZOLTICK: Yes.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: And it's difficult
`for us with room reservations and all that
`sort of thing, so.
` MR. ZOLTICK: No. I understand.
`And we had tried to move that date just to
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`6
`
`correspond to the one-week move we were
`looking at for Due Date 5 and 6, but I
`completely understand. And we'll go back and
`take a look at the schedule and see if
`there's any alternative that we can work up
`that won't affect the hearing date.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. I
`appreciate that.
` MR. ZOLTICK: Sure. Would you like
`me to move on to the second issue?
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Sure.
` MR. ZOLTICK: So the second issue
`relates to our request for -- to file a
`motion for additional discovery. And it
`centers on the real party-in-interest issue.
` The basis for the additional discovery
`that we're seeking centers on a company named
`Amtran and its joint venture partner,
`Everlight, and the issue of whether Amtran
`and/or Everlight are unnamed real
`parties-in-interest.
` And so if I could, I guess, give a
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`7
`
`little bit of context. We raised the issue
`independent of Preliminary Responses, but if
`I can give a little bit of context, I think
`it might be helpful with respect to our
`request.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay.
` MR. ZOLTICK: So I think the
`Board's aware, based on the Petition and the
`Patent Owner Preliminary Response, that the
`Patent Owner Nichia had asserted the
`patents -- the 250 Patent that is involved in
`the two IPRs against a company called
`Everlight.
` There was a trial that was held in May
`of 2015, and the Court found that Everlight
`infringed the 250 Patent and that the Patent
`was not invalid. And that went up on appeal.
`The decision was affirmed by the Federal
`Circuit in April of 2017.
` And Nichia had asserted the 250 Patent
`against other parties subsequent to the
`Everlight case. That included the Petitioner
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`8
`
`in these IPRs, Vizio, and then Vizio filed
`the Petitions that resulted in these two
`proceedings.
` And so with respect to Everlight,
`there's no question that under 315(b) there
`would be a 315(b) bar with respect to
`Everlight. And -- and we believe that
`there's enough suggestion in the publically
`available evidence that we have been able to
`locate of the relationship between the
`Petitioner Vizio, which is the sales arm of
`the company Amtran, and Everlight, which is a
`joint venture partner of Amtran, to support
`discovery into the issue of real
`party-in-interest.
` And it's particularly important because
`if, as we believe, there's a privity
`relationship and/or a real party-in-interest
`issue relating to Everlight, then that would
`be a case dispositive issue.
` So, we think, based on the evidence that
`we've got, that the discovery request, which
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`9
`
`I'll get into in a moment, regarding the real
`party-in-interest issue that we're going to
`seek authorization on represents more than a
`possibility and mere allegation. And so if I
`can run through that evidence, I think it
`would put our requests in further -- in
`further context.
` And the evidence that we've been able to
`locate is a public record that is regarding
`the relationship between the Petitioner Vizio
`and then the unnamed parties, Amtran and
`Everlight.
` And first off, Petitioner Vizio is
`represented as the sales arm of Amtran. So
`there's clearly a relationship between
`Petitioner Vizio and -- which is the sales
`arm of Amtran.
` And we also know that Amtran
`manufactures and distributes digital
`televisions with LED backlighting. And
`that's important because the LED, you know,
`backlighting and the LED packaging is the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`10
`
`subject matter of the Patent that's in these
`IPRs.
` And we also know that since 2009, that
`Amtran and Everlight have been joint venture
`partners specifically manufacturing with LED
`packaging -- LEDs and, therefore, LED
`packaging, which, again, is the subject
`matter that's at issue in the IPRs and the
`related infringement actions.
` And we cited some of that evidence in
`the Patent Owner Preliminary Responses which
`the Board addressed in the institution
`decisions.
` Since the -- those Patent Owner
`Preliminary Responses, we tried to look for
`additional evidence regarding the
`relationship between Vizio, Amtran, and
`Everlight. We've located some additional
`evidence.
` We have a Westlaw Company Investigator
`report which -- which we provided to counsel
`for the Petitioner. And the report shows
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`11
`
`that Vizio and Amtran have a shared business
`address and phone number in California. I
`think that the Petitioner's counsel is going
`to address that. But the document itself,
`which we understand is based on Federal
`Employer Identification Number records,
`indicates that Amtran and Vizio have the same
`business address and phone number.
` That's the additional and so the new
`evidence that we have. I've already
`discussed the evidence regarding the
`relationship that's already in the record.
` And, you know, we acknowledge that as --
`as you, the Board, has indicated in the
`institution decisions, that the evidence
`currently is not sufficient to prove that the
`Petitioner failed to identify all the real
`parties-in-interest.
` But with that said, we believe that this
`evidence is sufficient to warrant the
`additional discovery that we are seeking.
`And -- and to that end, the specific
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`12
`
`discovery requests that we anticipate or that
`we're seeking would be very limited number of
`document requests and interrogatories and
`would be specifically directed to two areas
`or two limited requests: One being
`communications between the Petitioner
`Vizio -- and when I say the "Petitioner
`Vizio," we would include Vizio's directors
`and officers, executives, and its counsel --
`and Amtran and/or Everlight. And, again,
`when I say "Amtran or Everlight," we would
`include within that their directors,
`officers, executives, and counsel.
` And those communications would be
`specifically regarding preparation, drafts,
`or filing of the Petitions or the IPRs. So
`we think that that type of request falls
`within what's, you know, acceptable and --
`and limited and narrowly tailored under what
`we understand the additional discovery
`guidance the Board has provided would be
`acceptable.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`13
`
` And then the second request would be the
`corporate and management structure of Vizio,
`Amtran, and Everlight. That would include
`any personnel from any one of these entities
`who participates in the management or
`corporate decision making of any of the other
`entities.
` So the first request really gets at the
`real party-in-interest. The second request
`gets at the privity issue. And that would
`be -- that would be it.
` So we think that there is sufficient
`evidence to establish the relationship
`between the Petitioner Vizio and the
`nonparties, Amtran and Everlight, such that
`we would satisfy the Garmin factor of more
`than a possibility and mere allegation.
` And I also want to mention that because
`of the nature of the request and how narrowly
`tailored they are, we don't think that this
`would be overly burdensome for the Petitioner
`to respond to. And --
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`14
`
` JUDGE McNAMARA: All right. Thank
`you.
` MR. ZOLTICK: -- I'm happy to
`answer any questions or speak to anything
`else if it would be helpful to the Board with
`respect to this issue.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Well, let's
`first hear from Vizio on this.
` MR. ZOLTICK: Sure.
` MS. HIGGINS: Thanks, your Honor.
`This is Gabrielle Higgins.
` First of all, as Petitioner set forth in
`the Petitions here, Vizio is the sole
`Petitioner and real party-in-interest. No
`other party is controlling these IPRs.
` We believe that no additional briefing
`and no additional discovery is warranted
`here. Patent Owner has not shown that there
`is more than a possibility and mere
`allegation that either Amtran or Everlight
`controls these IPRs under Garmin Factor (1).
` You know, as an initial matter, I think
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`15
`
`it's important to understand who these
`nonparties are. You know, the Patent Owner
`represented Vizio as the sales arm of Amtran.
`While we note that that is a characterization
`that was made in an article that was
`submitted with Patent Owner's Preliminary
`Response, for example, Exhibit 2128, we don't
`believe that that's a correct
`characterization.
` Amtran is one of several ODM, you know,
`manufacturer/suppliers to Vizio. They're a
`separate company. Everlight is also a
`separate company that is a component parts
`manufacturer.
` Now, first I'd like to address, the
`Patent Owner did send us yesterday what it
`refers to as additional evidence of company
`profile information. These are Westlaw
`printouts.
` We don't believe that they show that
`there's more than a possibility that a
`nonparty's controlling these IPRs. The
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`16
`
`accuracy of the information identified in the
`Westlaw Company Investigator reports, you
`know, we believe is questionable.
` But then, specifically, if we look at
`what Patent Owner pointed to us on the phone
`yesterday during our meet and confer, they
`pointed to what they characterize as an
`overlap in address. And they point to
`39 Tesla, which is an address down in Irvine,
`California. And that address, 39 Tesla, is
`Vizio's principal executive offices occupied
`solely by Vizio, not Amtran.
` Secondly, they identified a phone
`number, 949-428-2525, as allegedly
`overlapping between Vizio and Amtran. If you
`dial that number, you'll see that that is
`Vizio's general phone number when you call
`them at the 39 Tesla location. It is not an
`Amtran phone number.
` And they pointed out --
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Does Amtran have a
`separate phone number? Sorry to interrupt,
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`17
`
`but does Amtran have a separate phone number?
`I mean, if I were trying to reach them, would
`I call that number, get Vizio, and then get
`transferred to Amtran?
` MS. HIGGINS: Not that I'm aware
`of, your Honor. They also identified -- so
`they pointed to an Amtran account manager,
`which is -- which -- she's common to these
`reports. Her name is Lillian Chang. And
`there's another number associated with her.
`949-336-6633. That is an Amtran number, and
`if you dial that number, you will -- I did it
`yesterday. I got an Amtran recording. I
`confirmed that it's not a Vizio number. And
`Lillian Chang, which these Westlaw documents
`identify as an Amtran account manager, is not
`an employee of Vizio.
` So based on the evidence that was
`identified to us in these Westlaw reports,
`Patent Owner has presented -- hasn't
`presented any evidence of a common address or
`employee. And, more importantly, they
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`18
`
`haven't -- they haven't shown that any kind
`of common address or location would
`necessarily lead to meeting this Garmin -- it
`doesn't meet the Garmin Factor (1).
` Let me just cite just a couple of cases
`here. There are PTAB decisions, you know,
`that say that existing -- even if you had --
`and we have no evidence of it here -- common
`directors or employees between Petitioners
`and third parties, that alone is insufficient
`to show an RPI issue and insufficient to
`warrant discovery.
` For example, GlobalTel CBM2015-00145,
`paper 18, which denied Patent Owner's Motion
`for Additional Discovery regarding RPI, and
`said that the mere existence of a
`relationship between Petitioner and a parent
`company in that case was insufficient to
`demonstrate a real party-in-interest.
` There's also the Daifuku decision, which
`is IPR2015-01538. This is an institution
`decision paper 11 at page 11. And in that
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`19
`
`case at institution the Board found at
`institution that there wasn't persuasive
`evidence with respect to a holding company,
`Daifuku Holding. They were found that there
`was no persuasive evidence that they were a
`real party-in-interest.
` And there, in that institution decision,
`the Board said that a common address and
`telephone number, substantial overlap of
`officers, which Patent Owner has shown -- has
`not shown here, it establishes a relationship
`between parties. It does not establish a
`relationship between Daifuku Holdings and
`this proceeding.
` So it's very important that -- that the
`test here is, is there a relationship, not
`between parties but between the alleged RPI
`and this proceeding.
` And I think that also goes for some of
`the evidence that Patent Owner submitted in
`connection with the Petition, Exhibit 2128,
`which is a September 2009 article which is
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`20
`
`talking about the future talks between Amtran
`and Everlight as opposed to building a fac --
`a packaging facility.
` It's important to note that that joint
`venture quote that Patent Owner referred to
`is not a joint venture involving the
`Petitioner Vizio here.
` While Patent Owner did not raise it, you
`know, as the Board already found with respect
`to stock -- stock ownership, that's also not
`enough to control, you know, as the Board
`preliminarily found. And I will point out
`one additional decision there. Synaptics,
`IPR2016-00863, which is an institution
`decision paper 27 at 11, 12, where in that
`case, you know, common ownership of stock was
`not -- was not found to be sufficient to find
`an RPI.
` The Daifuku decision, which I already
`mentioned, also stands for that proposition
`that the exercise or availability of general
`control that stock ownership vests in
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`21
`
`stockholders such as parent-subsidiary
`relationships will not make one company a
`real party-in-interest of the other.
` Then with respect to the Patent Owner's
`requests, and I will say that when we met and
`conferred yesterday and from what I heard
`today, you know, we'd have to hear the exact
`wording of the request, because as they --
`because the exact wording and exactly whether
`they're referring to all communications or
`some specific communications would have to be
`worked out.
` But first with respect to their request
`regarding corporate management structure of
`Amtran, Everlight, and Vizio, as we've
`already said, Patent Owner, with respect to
`Garmin Factor (1), has not made that
`threshold showing with respect to -- even to
`get that request.
` With respect to Garmin Factor (5), we
`still believe that that -- we believe the
`request is overly burdensome and not
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`22
`
`responsibly tailored to identifying whether
`Amtran or Everlight controls the proceeding.
` And with respect to Garmin Factor (3),
`we believe that at least with respect to --
`to Vizio's, you know, officers and directors
`and so on, that information is available by
`other means. For example, the Dun &
`Bradstreet information Patent Owner provided
`us yesterday had a whole list of management
`of Vizio.
` And we're not quite sure how a request
`that goes to the corporate management
`structure of Amtran and Everlight, these
`separate companies, you know, why -- why
`Patent Owner would be asking Petitioner Vizio
`to provide that information. You know, we
`certainly -- you know, we might have some of
`that information based on publicly available
`information, but it wouldn't be on Vizio's,
`you know, personal knowledge to provide org
`charts or whatever of two other separate
`companies.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`23
`
` With respect to communications regarding
`the preparation, drafts, and filing of IPR
`Petitions, we also believe that the wording
`of that request is overly burdensome and
`would have to be specifically tailored to
`identifying whether Amtran or Everlight
`controls the proceeding. I would point out
`that, for instance, I think your -- one of
`your Honors was involved in the
`Samsung/Black Hills IPRs, and there I know
`that there were interrogatories that were
`specifically tailored, for instance, to
`identifying, you know, who actually, other
`than Vizio's counsel, received, you know,
`drafts of the Petition, which didn't happen
`here.
` And so in -- in conclusion, we do not
`believe that the Patent Owner has met its
`burden under Garmin Factor (1) with respect
`to any of the evidence that it has set forth.
`They haven't shown more than a possibility
`and mere allegation that Amtran or Everlight
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`24
`
`controls these IPRs under Garmin Factor (1).
`And we believe that the document requests are
`overboard under the other factors.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Let me ask
`a quick question to the Patent Owner. And
`this concerns your request for the corporate
`management structure of Amtran and Everlight.
`Is that information not publicly available?
` MR. ZOLTICK: There's some
`information that we've been able to see
`from, you know, the corporate reports like on
`Westlaw. But that doesn't indicate at all
`who would participate in decision making with
`respect to one entity over another.
` In other words, we know there's this
`relationship between Vizio and Amtran and --
`and the question really is, does Amtran have
`any management or corporate decision-making
`authority over Vizio. And so --
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Let me try
`and parse this out a little better because
`we're -- we're -- you know, part of your
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`25
`
`argument was Vizio and Everlight as well.
`So -- but what I'm trying to figure out is,
`why, then, do you believe -- well, what leads
`you to conclude that Vizio would have any
`information that's not publicly available
`about the management structure of Amtran or
`Everlight?
` MR. ZOLTICK: Well, again, the
`publicly available information that we have,
`and I know that, you know, the Petitioner's
`counsel is disputing that some of it is
`correct, shows that, you know, there is a
`relationship -- more than just a supplier --
`manufacturer/supplier/distributor
`relationship between Amtran and Vizio.
` And we know, also, that there is this
`relationship between Amtran and Everlight in
`connection with manufacturing the LEDs that
`are at issue in the infringement case and in
`the -- you know, the subject matter of the --
`of the IPRs.
` And so there -- you know, we -- given --
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`26
`
`given the relationship that exists between
`these parties, we believe that they are
`communicating and cooperating with each
`other, potentially. And we simply want the
`right to be able to ask that in discovery.
` I mean, a lot of the argument that was
`being made has to do with whether or not
`we've shown that those unnamed parties are
`real parties-in-interest, but we're not at
`that point yet. We're asking the Board for
`authorization to file our motion for
`additional discovery where we would lay out
`the, you know, specific discovery that we
`would seek, which I -- which I, you know,
`explained.
` And so we think there's enough evidence
`in the record thus far to at least get us to
`the point where we should be able to file our
`motion, identify specifically what discovery,
`you know, we're seeking, and go from there.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. I think I
`get your point.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`27
`
` MS. HIGGINS: Your Honor --
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Can you hear me?
` MS. HIGGINS: Yes, your Honor. Can
`you hear me? Sorry.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Yes. Okay,
`I'm sorry. I was -- I was about to ask a
`question, so.
` MS. HIGGINS: Okay. Sure. I'm
`sorry, your Honor. Sorry to interrupt.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: That's all right.
`I think at one point my mute button might
`have been accidently triggered as well.
` But in any case, as to Amtran, and this
`question actually goes to the Petitioner, you
`refer to Amtran as one of several suppliers
`to Vizio. What does Amtran supply?
` MS. HIGGINS: Televisions,
`your Honor.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. So
`Amtran -- and that's why they got -- that's
`why some people have characterized Vizio as
`the sales arm of Amtran -- is that
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`28
`
`correct? -- because they sell televisions
`that are manufactured by Amtran; is that
`right?
` MS. HIGGINS: They sell televisions
`that are manufactured by Amtran. I'm not
`sure why they refer to it as the sales arm,
`but that is a correct statement, your Honor.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Okay. Just
`out of curiosity, does Vizio sell televisions
`manufactured by anyone else?
` MS. HIGGINS: Yes, they -- I do not
`have at my fingertips -- I can probably
`get --
` JUDGE McNAMARA: You don't need to
`answer that.
` MS. HIGGINS: But there are at
`least -- there are at least four ODMs --
`original design manufacturers -- that sell
`televisions to Vizio.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. Great. I'm
`not taking discovery, so I'm not -- so you
`don't have to answer that. I just wanted to
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`29
`
`ask that one question. Okay. Because you
`had said Amtran was one of several suppliers
`to Vizio.
` MS. HIGGINS: Yes.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Okay. So -- and
`my understanding from the Patent Owner is
`that there are some allegations as to a
`relationship between Amtran and Everlight and
`in the form of a joint venture and that --
`that -- some public information about that;
`is that correct?
` MR. ZOLTICK: That's correct.
` MS. HIGGINS: The Patent Owner
`submitted an exhibit, which I would point out
`is more about what could happen in the
`future. I -- you know, I -- I don't know for
`sure whether there is a joint venture, but I
`would say that even if there was, it is
`irrelevant to the pertinent issue here which
`has to do with the control of this -- you
`know, these proceedings. And I also
`report --
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`30
`
` JUDGE McNAMARA: I understand. The
`issue -- I think -- I think there are two
`questions. There's one, of course, about
`real party-in-interest, and then there's the
`issue of privity.
` MR. ZOLTICK: Right.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: And that's why I
`think the Patent Owner's counsel said the --
`they were asking for discovery concerning the
`corporate management structure as opposed to
`the discovery relative to the preparation of
`drafts and petitions and the IPR, which --
`which -- which is, perhaps, drawn to a
`slightly different focus.
` So in any case, though, so I'm just
`trying to get -- we're probably not going to
`make a ruling on this during this call.
`We'll probably take it under advisement. But
`I'm just trying to make sure I understand
`what the parties' positions are and the --
`and the scope of the discovery that's being
`sought.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`31
`
` Of course, that would come up more
`specifically in a motion if we -- Motion for
`Discovery if we authorize it.
` The other question, and this has to do
`with the -- aside from the addresses and the
`telephone numbers that are apparently in some
`dispute as to what they really are, is there
`any other basis that the Patent Owner has for
`seeking discovery on the relationship between
`Vizio and Amtran?
` MR. ZOLTICK: I think there are
`some other -- well, the original exhibits
`that were put into the record where there
`were documents that were -- I believe it was
`in the industry magazine where they were
`referring to Vizio as being the sales arm of
`Amtran. And when we -- we learned that that
`was -- that Petitioner was taking issue with
`that, we went and did some further
`investigation from these -- the records, the
`UCC filings and the Federal -- its FEIN
`database that Westlaw, you know, aggregates
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`32
`
`when you do a Company Investigator report.
`And that's when we discovered, and I
`understand that Petitioner's disputing it,
`but -- but I'm just telling you what's in
`those records, that there's a common, you
`know, business address, 39 Tesla. And the
`report, you know, indicates that Amtran is
`there as well as Vizio Services. They have
`the same address, and then it says, "Shared
`phone number."
` So, I -- you know, I'm just -- so we're
`basing our request for authorization to file
`the motion on the information that we -- that
`we have. It's not that Petitioner can't
`dispute it. But -- but that's the evidence
`that we have that is giving rise to this
`request.
` JUDGE McNAMARA: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.
` MR. ZOLTICK: So beyond -- beyond
`the information about Vizio being the sales
`arm of Amtran, and there's some other things
`underneath that about some, you know, stock
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`
`
`Transcript of Teleconference
`Conducted on February 28, 2018
`
`33
`
`ownership in the company, that Amtran owns
`15 percent of Vizio's stock and so on, but --
`b