`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 6
`
`
` Entered: January 30, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MEC RESOURCES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00286
`Patent 6,137,390
`____________
`
`
`Before KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, and
`ROBERT J. WEINSCHENK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`DESHPANDE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
`Ex. 2017, p. 1
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00286
`Patent 6,137,390
`
`
`The Board held a conference call with MEC Resources, Inc. (“Patent
`Owner”) and Apple, Inc. (“Petitioner”). A court reporter was also present on
`the conference call, and Patent Owner agrees to submit the transcript to the
`Board when it is available.
`Patent Owner requested authorization to file a motion to dismiss and a
`stay of the deadline for Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response. Patent
`Owner’s basis for these requests is Patent Owner’s alleged tribal sovereign
`immunity. Petitioner opposed, arguing that the issue of sovereign immunity
`has already been decided by the Board. Petitioner indicated, though, that if
`the Board authorized Patent Owner to file a motion to dismiss, Petitioner did
`not oppose a stay of the deadline for Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response.
`The Board determines that briefing on the issue of Patent Owner’s
`alleged tribal sovereign immunity from this proceeding is warranted.
`Accordingly, the Board authorized Patent Owner to file a motion to dismiss
`on the basis of tribal sovereign immunity of no more than 25 pages due by
`February 13, 2018. The Board also authorized Petitioner to file an
`opposition to the motion, also of no more than 25 pages due by February 27,
`2018. Petitioner will request a conference call with the Board and Patent
`Owner by February 16, 2018, if an extension of time or other relief is
`allegedly needed. Patent Owner is further authorized to file a reply to the
`Petitioner’s opposition of no more than 15 pages due by March 8, 2018.
`Evidence relevant to the tribal sovereign immunity issue may be filed as
`exhibits accompanying the papers.
`
`Patent Owner Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
`Ex. 2017, p. 2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00286
`Patent 6,137,390
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is:
` ORDERED that Patent Owner is authorized to file a motion to dismiss
`in IPR2018-00286, to not exceed 25 pages, and is due on February 13, 2018;
` FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is authorized to file an
`opposition to Patent Owner’s motion to dismiss, to not exceed 25 pages, and
`is due on February 27, 2018;
` FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner will request a conference call
`with the Board and Patent Owner by February 16, 2018 if any extension of
`time or other relief is allegedly needed;
` FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is authorized to file a reply
`to Petitioner’s opposition, to not exceed 15 pages, and is due on March 8,
`2018; and
` FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response is stayed and will be due one month from the issuance
`of a decision on Patent Owner’s motion to dismiss.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
`Ex. 2017, p. 3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00286
`Patent 6,137,390
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`David M. O’Dell
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`Gregory P. Huh
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`gregory.huh.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert D. Katz
`KATZ PLLC
`rkatz@katzfirm.com
`
`Lewis E. Hudnell, III
`HUDNELL LAW GROUP P.C.
`lewis@hudnelllaw.com
`
`
`Patent Owner Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
`Ex. 2017, p. 4
`
`
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
