`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 25
`Date: May 25, 2021
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`FG SRC LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01449
`Patent 7,149,867
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`KARA L. SZPONDOWSKI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`SZPONDOWSKI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01449
`Patent 7,149,867
`
`
`On May 18, 2021, Patent Owner contacted the Board by email to
`request “guidance regarding the current schedule in light of the Board’s
`pending decision on Petitioner’s Motion to Submit Supplemental
`Information.” Ex. 3005. Patent Owner stated that it “may seek an extension
`of the due date [May 26, 2021] for its Patent Owner Response and Motion to
`Amend based on the guidance that we receive from the Board.” Id.
`On May 24, 2021, a conference call was held with counsel for the
`parties and Judges Szpondowski, Deshpande, and Anderson. During the
`call, Patent Owner requested guidance as to the timing of the Board’s
`decision on Petitioner’s Motion to Submit Supplemental (Paper 21,
`“Motion”),1 and stated that if the Motion is granted, Patent Owner may need
`to conduct additional depositions. Patent Owner also suggested moving the
`due date of the Response to June 3, 2021. Petitioner opposed moving the
`due date of the Response, and suggested Patent Owner submit an additional
`paper, if necessary. Petitioner also argued that Patent Owner should have
`raised this timing issue sooner.
`The Board indicated to the parties that a decision on the Motion was
`forthcoming. However, the Board recognized that it seemed reasonable to
`move the due date of the Patent Owner Response so that Patent Owner has
`the benefit of the Board’s decision on the Motion in preparing its Response,
`including any discovery. The Board also reminded the parties that they may
`adjust the due date of the Response without the Board’s authorization. The
`parties indicated that they would work together on a schedule for the
`Response.
`
`1 The Motion to Submit Supplemental Information was fully briefed as of
`May 12, 2021.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01449
`Patent 7,149,867
`
`
`Petitioner requested that (1) the due date for Patent Owner’s Motion
`to Amend remain on May 26, 2021, and (2) Patent Owner identify, for
`scheduling purposes, which of the five individuals they would like to
`depose, assuming the Board grants the Motion. Patent Owner agreed to
`identify the individuals, but suggested keeping the Motion to Amend on the
`same schedule as the Response. Petitioner raised concerns as to
`compression of the schedule if the Motion to Amend date is also moved.
`The Board indicated that there seemed to be no reason to move the
`due date on the Motion to Amend, as it was unrelated to the Motion, but that
`the parties should work together on a schedule for the Response, and if
`necessary, the Reply and Sur-Reply. The Board reminded the parties to file
`a stipulation of the schedule once they reached a compromise.
`At the end of the conference call, the parties agreed to the following
`Order.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer to determine an
`appropriate schedule for the Response and, if necessary, the Reply and Sur-
`Reply; and
`FURTHER ORDERED, the deadline for Patent Owner to file a
`motion to amend, Due Date 1, remains May 26, 2021 (see Paper 14, 10 (Due
`Date Appendix)).
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01449
`Patent 7,149,867
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Brian Nash
`Brian.nash@pillsburylaw.com
`
`Evan Finkel
`Evan.finkel@pillsburylaw.com
`
`Matthew Hindman
`Matthew.hindman@pillsburylaw.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jay Kesan
`jay@jaykesan.com
`
`Ari Rafilson
`arafilson@shorechan.com
`
`
`
`
`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
