`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________________________
`
`
`Intel Corporation
`Petitioner,
`v.
`ParkerVision, Inc.
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________________________________________
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01265
`Patent No. 7,110,444
`____________________________________________
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01265
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
`Pursuant to the Board’s January 28, 2021 Scheduling Order (Paper No. 11),
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests oral argument, as currently scheduled on November
`
`1, 2021. Petitioner respectfully requests that the oral argument take place remotely
`
`pursuant to the USPTO update on in-person meetings of March 13, 2020
`
`(https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-update-person-meetings).
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests the ability to present possible demonstratives and
`
`exhibits.
`
`The parties met and conferred but did not agree on the amount of argument
`
`time to request. Because Petitioner does not believe this proceeding presents any
`
`special circumstances warranting more time than ordinarily required, Petitioner
`
`requests sixty (60) minutes of argument time for each side, consistent with the
`
`Board’s ordinary practice. See PTAB Trial Practice Guide (November 2019) at
`
`81-82 (“[t]he Board expects to ordinarily provide for an hour of argument per side
`
`for a single proceeding”). Patent Owner requests seventy-five (75) minutes of
`
`argument time for each side.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70, Petitioner specifies the following issues to be
`
`argued:
`
`
`
`
` Issues related to the Board’s Decision on Institution and the grounds
`
`instituted in the Decision.
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01265
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
` Interpretation of the claim terms “frequency down-conversion
`
`module,” “subtraction module,” “storage element,” and “switch.”
`
` Interpretation of an “energy transfer system” under Patent Owner’s
`
`proposed construction of “storage element”
`
` The patentability of challenged claims 1, 3, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`103 over Tayloe in view of TI Datasheet.
`
` The patentability of challenged claims 1, 3, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`103 over Tayloe in view of Kawada.
`
` The secondary considerations of non-obviousness alleged in Patent
`
`Owner’s Response.
`
` Patent Owner’s intent to disclaim claims 1 and 5.
`
` Petitioner’s arguments raised in the Petition and Petitioner’s Reply.
`
` Petitioner’s response to any arguments raised in Patent Owner’s
`
`Response and Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply.
`
` Petitioner’s response to any issues specified by Patent Owner in its
`
`request for oral argument.
`
` Petitioner’s response to any issues raised in briefing pursuant to the
`
`schedule.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: September 23, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01265
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Brian J. Lambson/
`Brian J. Lambson
`Registration No. 72,570
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01265
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that, on September 23, 2021, I caused a true and correct
`
`copy of the foregoing materials:
`
` Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
`
`to be served via email, as consented to by Patent Owner, to:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jason S. Charkow (jcharkow@daignaultiyer.com)
`Chandran B. Iyer (cbiyer@daignaultiyer.com)
`Stephanie R. Mandir (smandir@daignaultiyer.com)
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Brian J. Lambson/
`Brian J. Lambson
`Registration No. 72,570
`
`
`
`
`
`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
