Trials@uspto.gov
`571–272–7822
`
`Paper 26
`Entered: October 21, 2019
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MICHELLE N. WORMMEESTER, AMANDA F. WIEKER, and
`SCOTT B. HOWARD, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WIEKER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Oral Hearing
`35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(10) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`571–272–7822
`
`Paper 26
`Entered: October 21, 2019
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MICHELLE N. WORMMEESTER, AMANDA F. WIEKER, and
`SCOTT B. HOWARD, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WIEKER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Oral Hearing
`35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(10) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`
`
`On February 15, 2019, we instituted an inter partes review proceeding
`as to claims 1–34 of U.S. Patent No. 8,665,239 B2. Paper 7. The
`Scheduling Order for this proceeding provided that an oral hearing would be
`conducted if requested by the parties and granted by the Board. Paper 8, 6.
`Both parties request oral argument, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a).
`Papers 24, 25. The parties’ requests are granted.
`The hearing will commence at 3:15 pm Eastern Time on
`November 14, 2019, and will be open to the public for in-person attendance
`on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria,
`Virginia. In-person attendance will be accommodated on a first-come, first-
`served basis. We will provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing.
`Both Petitioner and Patent Owner request 60 minutes of oral argument
`Papers 24, 25. We have reviewed the issues that the parties intend to
`address in this proceeding, and we determine that each party will be
`accorded 60 minutes of total argument time.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the challenged
`claims are unpatentable. 35 U.S.C. § 316(e). Petitioner, therefore, will open
`the hearing by presenting its case regarding the challenged claims. After
`Petitioner’s presentation, Patent Owner may respond to Petitioner’s
`argument. Petitioner may reserve time for rebuttal, out of its allotted time,
`to respond to argument presented by Patent Owner. Patent Owner may also
`reserve time for sur-rebuttal, out of its allotted time, to respond to argument
`presented by Petitioner in its rebuttal.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits, if any, must
`be served no later than seven (7) business days before the hearing date.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`
`They shall be filed with the Board no later than five (5) business days before
`the hearing date. Demonstrative exhibits are merely a visual aid for use
`at the hearing and are not evidence. Each slide should be clearly marked
`as such: for example, each slide may be marked with the words
`“DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE,” in the footer.
`Demonstrative exhibits shall not introduce new arguments or evidence. The
`parties shall meet and confer to discuss any objections to demonstrative
`exhibits at least three (3) business days before the hearing. If any issues
`regarding demonstratives remain unresolved after the parties meet and
`confer, the parties shall file jointly a one-page list of objections to the
`demonstrative exhibits at least two (2) business days before the hearing. For
`each objection, the list must identify with particularity the demonstratives
`subject to the objection and include a short, one-sentence statement
`explaining the objection. We will consider the objections and schedule a
`conference call if necessary. For further guidance on what constitutes an
`appropriate demonstrative exhibit, the parties are directed to St. Jude
`Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. Board of Regents of the University of
`Michigan, IPR2013-00041, Paper 65 at 2–5 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014).
`A member of the panel may attend the hearing electronically from a
`remote location and would have access only to the courtesy copy of the
`demonstratives provided in advance, as referenced above, and would not be
`able to view the projection screen in the hearing room. We take this
`opportunity to remind the parties that each 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
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`
`reporter’s transcript, and to enable any judge that is attending the hearing
`from a remote location to follow the presentation.
`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 as long as that counsel is present in person. 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 (2) business days prior to the oral hearing to discuss the matter.
`A party may request remote video attendance for one or more of its
`other attendees to view the hearing from any USPTO location. The
`available locations include the Texas Regional Office in Dallas, Texas; the
`Rocky Mountain Regional Office in Denver, Colorado; the Elijah J. McCoy
`Midwest Regional Office in Detroit, Michigan; and the Silicon Valley Office
`in San Jose, CA. To request remote video viewing, a party must send an
`email message to Trials@uspto.gov ten (10) business days prior to the
`hearing, indicating the requested location and the number planning to view
`the hearing from the remote location. The Board will notify the parties if the
`request for video viewing is granted. Note that it may not be possible to
`grant the request due to the availability of resources.
`Any special requests for audio-visual equipment should be directed to
`Trials@uspto.gov. A party may also indicate any special requests related to
`appearing at an in-person oral hearing, such as a request to accommodate
`physical needs that limit mobility or visual or hearing impairments, and
`indicate how the PTAB may accommodate the special request. Any special
`requests must be presented in a separate communication not less than
`five (5) days before the hearing. If the requests are not received timely,
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01276
`Patent 8,971,861 B2
`
`requested accommodations and/or equipment may not be available on the
`day of the hearing.
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Walter Renner
`Timothy Riffe
`Thomas Rozylowicz
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`riffe@fr.com
`tar@fr.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Eagle Robinson
`Ross Viguet
`NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`eagle.robinson@nortonrosefulbright.com
`ross.viguet@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`
`
`5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
