`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 12
`Entered: April 4, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Cases
`IPR2018-01334
`IPR2018-01335
`IPR2018-01336
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, and
`AARON W. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Consolidation of Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.122(a)
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01334
`IPR2018-01335
`IPR2018-01336
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`In recent separate decisions, we instituted inter partes reviews in
`Cases IPR2018-01334, IPR2018-01335, and IPR2018-01336. Paper 10 in
`each proceeding (entered March 18, 2019). These three proceedings involve
`the same parties, the same patent, and overlapping prior art. On March 27,
`2019, we held a conference call with the parties to discuss consolidation of
`these cases. David Cavanaugh and Thomas Anderson appeared for
`Petitioner, and David Cochran and Joseph Sauer appeared for Patent Owner.
`This Order reflects the substance of what was discussed on the call.
`In order to secure just, speedy, and inexpensive resolutions of all three
`proceedings, and to administer the proceedings efficiently, we exercise our
`authority to consolidate the trials in IPR2018-01335 and IPR2018-01336
`with the trial in IPR2018-01334. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1(b), 42.122(a).
`IPR2018-01335 and IPR2018-01336 are no longer necessary as
`separate proceedings and are terminated. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Unless
`otherwise ordered, any further papers and exhibits shall be filed only in
`IPR2018-01334. Consequently, Petitioner and Patent Owner each may file
`only one paper for each of the parties’ respective deadlines set out in the
`Scheduling Order (Paper 11). During the call, the parties stated that they
`had agreed on word limits for certain papers as follows: 35,000 words for
`the Patent Owner Response; 14,000 words for Petitioner’s Reply; and
`14,000 words for Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply. We accept the parties’
`proposed word limits for these papers. The page and word count limitations
`set forth in our Rules shall apply to all other papers. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.24.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01334
`IPR2018-01335
`IPR2018-01336
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`
`Petitioner filed a number of exhibits in each case that are duplicates of
`exhibits in other cases but numbered uniquely in each case and cited
`according to the unique exhibit number in each corresponding petition and
`preliminary response. The parties are ordered to confer and file a paper in
`surviving case IPR2018-01334 that identifies exhibits that are substantively
`identical among all three cases. Such duplicated exhibits shall not be re-
`filed in case IPR2018-01334. Exhibits from either IPR2018-01335 or
`IPR2018-01336 that are not in the record in IPR2018-01334 will be filed in
`IPR2018-01334. All further filed papers will refer to exhibit numbers in
`surviving case IPR2018-01334.
`
`
`ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the trials of IPR2018-01335 and IPR2018-01336 are
`consolidated with the trial of IPR2018-01334, and a copy of this Order is
`filed in all three cases;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the grounds of unpatentability on which
`the consolidated trial shall proceed are as follows:
`(1) claims 1–15, 22, and 23 as obvious over Bauer, Svensson, and
`Kim; and
`(2) claims 16 and 17 as obvious over Bauer, Svensson, Kim, and
`Zhao; and
`(3) claims 18–21 as obvious over Bauer, Svensson, Kim, and Lim.
`FURTHER ORDERED that IPR2018-01335 and IPR2018-01336 are
`terminated;
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01334
`IPR2018-01335
`IPR2018-01336
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that each Party shall file in surviving case
`IPR2018-01334 any exhibits from IPR2018-01335 or IPR2018-01336 that
`are not of record in IPR2018-01334 within ten (10) business days of the
`entry of this Order;
`FURTHER ORDERED that each Party shall file an exhibit list in
`IPR2018-01334 identifying (1) the exhibits previously filed in
`IPR2018-01334 and (2) the exhibits newly filed in IPR2018-01334 as a
`result of consolidation within ten (10) business days of the entry of this
`Order;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly file a paper in
`surviving case IPR2018-01334 that identifies exhibits that are substantively
`identical among all three cases;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the case caption in IPR2018-01334 shall
`be changed to reflect the consolidation of IPR2018-01335 and
`IPR2018-01336 with IPR2018-01334, in accordance with the attached
`example; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that word count limitations for certain papers
`are modified as follows: 35,000 words for the Patent Owner Response;
`14,000 words for Petitioner’s Reply; and 14,000 words for Patent Owner’s
`Sur-Reply.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01334
`IPR2018-01335
`IPR2018-01336
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David Cavanaugh
`Thomas Anderson
`Joseph Haag
`Christopher O’Biren
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
`David.cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Tom.aderson@wilmerhale.com
`Joseph.haag@wilmerhale.com
`Chirstopher.obrien@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`David Cochran
`Matthew Johnson
`Joseph Sauer
`David Maiorana
`Richard Graham
`Joshua Nightingale
`JONES DAY
`dcochran@jonesday.com
`mwjohnson@jonesday.com
`jmsauer@jonesday.com
`dmaiorana@jonesday.com
`ragraham@jonesday.com
`jrnightingale@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2018-013341
`Patent 8,838,949 B2
`
`
`
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, and
`AARON W. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2018-01335 and IPR2018-01336 have been consolidated with the
`instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`