`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC., AND APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2021-00144
`Patent 8,095,879
`
`____________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC’S
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 and the Board’s Scheduling Order (Paper 27),
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC (“Patent Owner”) respectfully requests oral argument,
`
`as currently scheduled for September 6, 2022. Patent Owner respectfully requests
`
`that said oral argument be held at the PTAB’s regional office in San Jose,
`
`California. Paper 45, 2. If the Board determines that a hearing in San Jose,
`
`California is not feasible, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the hearing be
`
`conducted remotely via video conference.
`
`Reservation of Time: Patent Owner requests an opportunity to reserve sur-
`
`rebuttal time to respond to rebuttal arguments by Petitioner, and an opportunity to
`
`provide a closing statement. Compare, e.g., Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd.
`
`et al. v. VirnetX, Inc., IPR2015-01046/01047, Paper 60, 2 (PTAB Jun. 2, 2016)
`
`(“Both parties may reserve some of their argument time for rebuttal, and Patent
`
`Owner will be afforded an opportunity to provide a closing statement along with
`
`any rebuttal.”). Patent Owner requests sixty minutes of total time for each side.
`
`Issues for Argument: Without waiving any issue not specifically identified,
`
`Patent Owner specifies at least the following issues it may discuss at argument:
`
`• Issues related to the instituted grounds (i.e., that claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 14-17 are
`
`not obvious over Hirayama307 in view of Ren, that claim 3 is not obvious
`
`over Hirayama307 in view of Ren and Hirayama878, that claims 6, 13 are
`
`not obvious over Hirayama307 in view of Ren and Allard, and that claim 12
`
`
`
`is not obvious over Hirayama307 in view of Henckel), including, for
`
`example, claim construction, anticipation, obviousness, motivation to
`
`combine, and reasonable expectation of success;
`
`• The timeliness of the arguments raised by Petitioner in the proceedings;
`
`• Any motion to exclude filed by the parties;
`
`• Any other relevant issues raised in papers filed in this proceeding, including
`
`issues raised in papers yet to be filed; and
`
`• Any other issues that the Board deems necessary for issuing a Final Written
`
`Decision, including any questions, rebuttals, or arguments that may arise
`
`during the oral argument.
`
`The Board’s advance guidance is respectfully solicited as to any questions
`
`the Board specifically wishes to be addressed.
`
`Equipment: Patent Owner requests the ability to use a computer, projector,
`
`and screen to display possible demonstratives and exhibits.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/ Kenneth J. Weatherwax /
`
`
`Kenneth J. Weatherwax, Reg. No. 54,528
`Nathan Lowenstein, Pro hac vice
`Parham Hendifar, Reg. No. 71,470
`LOWENSTEIN & WEATHERWAX LLP
`Date: July 22, 2022
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the following documents were served
`
`by electronic service, by agreement between the parties, on the date below:
`
`PATENT OWNER NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC’S
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`The names and address of the parties being served are as follows:
`
`IPR50095-0015IP1@fr.com
`holt@fr.com
`tiffany.miller@dlapiper.com
`jim.heintz@dlapiper.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`
`
`W. Karl Renner
`David Holt
`Tiffany C. Miller
`James M. Heintz
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Vinson Lin/
`
`
`
`Date: July 22, 2022
`
`
`
`
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
