Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 24
`Entered: September 25, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`NETFLIX, INC. and COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICAITONS, LLC,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)1
`Case IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, KEVIN W. CHERRY, and
`KAMRAN JIVANI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BRADEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`1 Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, filed a petition in IPR2019-00786,
`and has been joined as a party to this proceeding.
`2 The Order concerns a matter applicable to both proceedings. We exercise
`our discretion to file a single Order in both cases. The parties, however, are
`not authorized to use this caption.
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 24
`Entered: September 25, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`NETFLIX, INC. and COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICAITONS, LLC,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)1
`Case IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, KEVIN W. CHERRY, and
`KAMRAN JIVANI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BRADEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`1 Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, filed a petition in IPR2019-00786,
`and has been joined as a party to this proceeding.
`2 The Order concerns a matter applicable to both proceedings. We exercise
`our discretion to file a single Order in both cases. The parties, however, are
`not authorized to use this caption.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`
`
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`On February 4, 2019, we entered a Decision to Institute a trial
`proceeding in IPR2018-01187. Paper 22. A Scheduling Order set the date
`for oral hearing, if requested by either party, as October 15, 2019.
`Paper 23, 8. On April 18, 2019, we entered a Decision to Institute a trial
`proceeding in IPR2018-01630. Paper 13. A Scheduling Order set the date
`for oral hearing in that related proceeding as October 14, 2019. Paper 14,
`11. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70, both parties have requested oral
`argument in each proceeding. See Papers 30, 34.3 The parties’ requests for
`oral argument are granted.
`Oral argument for this proceeding will be held on October 15, 2019
`on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria,
`Virginia. The hearing will commence at 1:00 PM Eastern Time and it will
`be open to the public for in-person attendance. In-person attendance will be
`accommodated on a first-come-first-served basis. If the parties have any
`concern about disclosing confidential information, they are to contact the
`Board at least five (5) business days in advance of the hearing to discuss the
`matter.
`Each party will have seventy-five (75) minutes of total time to
`present arguments for both its cases. Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of
`proof that the claims at issue are unpatentable. Therefore, Petitioner will
`proceed first to present its cases with regard to the challenged claims and
`
`
`3 Citations are to the record in IPR2018-01187. Similar requests were made
`in IPR2018-01630.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`
`grounds on which we instituted trial in this proceeding and may reserve no
`more than half its time for rebuttal. Thereafter, Patent Owner will respond
`to Petitioner's case. After that, Petitioner may use the rest of its time for its
`rebuttal, responding to Patent Owner's specific arguments presented at the
`oral hearing. If Patent Owner has reserved time for sur-rebuttal and up to
`the time remaining, Patent Owner may present sur-rebuttal argument. No
`live testimony from any witness will be taken at the oral hearing.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing.
`The parties are reminded that under 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(7), a
`proponent of deposition testimony must file such testimony as an exhibit.
`The Board will not consider any deposition testimony that has not been so
`filed.
`
`Furthermore, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits
`must be served at least five (5) business days before the hearing. The
`demonstrative exhibits in this case are not evidence and are intended
`only to assist the parties in presenting their oral argument to the Board.
`The parties shall serve objections to each other at least four (4) business days
`before the hearing. The parties shall meet and confer in good faith in an
`attempt to resolved objections. For any unresolved objections, the parties
`must, file the objections to the demonstratives with the Board at least three
`(3) business days before the hearing. Any objection to the demonstrative
`exhibits that is not presented timely will be considered waived. The
`objections should identify with particularity which demonstratives are
`subject to objection, and include a short (one sentence or less) statement of
`the reason for each objection. No argument or further explanation is
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`
`permitted. The Board will consider the objections and schedule a
`conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will reserve ruling on
`the objections until after the oral argument. The parties are directed to
`St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the
`University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB January 27, 2014) (Paper
`65), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits.
`Although demonstrative exhibits in this case are not evidence, the
`parties shall file the demonstrative exhibits into the records of these
`proceedings at least three (3) business days prior to the hearing. The parties
`also shall provide a courtesy copy of any demonstrative exhibits to the
`Board at least three (3) business days prior to the hearing by emailing them
`to Trials@uspto.gov.
`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 USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia;
`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 at least ten (10) business
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`
`days prior to the hearing, indicating the requested location and the number of
`attendees 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.
`At least two judges will be participating remotely via a
`videoconferencing device and will not be able to view the projection screen
`in the hearing room. Thus, overhead projectors or document cameras (e.g.,
`Elmos) are unavailable for the hearing. The parties are reminded that the
`presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit
`(e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to avoid
`confusion, and to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01187 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`IPR2018-01630 (Patent 9,769,477 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Harper Batts
`Christopher Ponder
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`hbatts@sheppardmullin.com
`cponder@sheppardmullin.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Joel P.N. Stonedale
`Kayvan B. Noroozi
`NOROOZI PC
`joel@noroozipc.com
`kayvan@noroozipc.com
`
`
`Neil A. Rubin
`Kent Shum
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`nrubin@raklaw.com
`kshum@raklaw.com
`
`
`
`6
`
`
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
