`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 7
`
`Entered: September 13, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`GOOGLE, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2018-01079 (8,213,970)
`IPR2018-01081 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01082 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01085 (9,467,838)1
`
`
`_______________
`
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, CHRISTA P.
`ZADO, KEVIN C. TROCK, and FREDERICK C. LANEY, Administrative
`Patent Judges.
`
`ZADO, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108(c)
`
`
`
`
`1 The parties are not authorized to use this style of caption.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01079 (8,213,970)
`IPR2018-01081 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01082 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01085 (9,467,838)
`
`
`On September 4, 2018, Google, LLC (“Petitioner”) sent an e-mail to
`the Board seeking a conference call to discuss its request to file a reply to
`AGIS Software Development, LLC’s (“Patent Owner”) Preliminary
`Response in the above-captioned proceedings. Patent Owner opposes
`Petitioner’s request. On September 6, 2018, a conference call was held with
`counsel for the parties and Judges Galligan, Zado, and Laney to discuss the
`request.
`In the Preliminary Response, Patent Owner asserts Petitioner has not
`satisfied its duty of candor under 37 C.F.R. § 42.11 and § 11.18(b)(2) on
`grounds that Petitioner and its real parties in interest “have knowingly
`advanced conflicting” claim constructions in district court. See, e.g.,
`IPR2018-01079, Paper 6, 20. Patent Owner argues the Board should
`therefore deny the Petition “in its entirety.” Id. at 24. Petitioner seeks
`authorization to file a five-page reply.
`We determine that under the circumstances presented here, good
`cause exists, and we, therefore, authorize Petitioner to file a reply in these
`proceedings. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.108(c).
`It is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s request to file a reply under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.108(c) to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the reply is not to exceed three (3) pages,
`and must be filed no later than September 19, 2018; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the reply is limited to addressing
`assertions and arguments in the Preliminary Response relating to the
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01079 (8,213,970)
`IPR2018-01081 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01082 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01085 (9,467,838)
`
`requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.11 and § 11.18(b)(2), and Petitioner’s duty
`of candor.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01079 (8,213,970)
`IPR2018-01081 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01082 (9,445,251)
`IPR2018-01085 (9,467,838)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Jonathan Tuminaro
`Robert E. Sokohl
`Karen Wong-Chan
`Ryan C. Richardson
`Dohm Chankong
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`jtuminar-ptab@sternekessler.com
`rsokohl-ptab@sternekessler.com
`kwchan-ptab@sternekessler.com
`rrichardson-ptab@sternekessler.com
`dchangkong-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Vincent J. Rubino, III
`Alfred R. Fabrican
`Peter Lambrianakos
`Enrique W. Iturralde
`BROWN RUDNICK LLP
`vrubino@brownrudnick.com
`afabricant@brownrudnick.com
`plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`eiturralde@brownrudnick.com
`
`4
`
`