`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 24
`Entered: January 6, 2022
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BOSE CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`KOSS CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-00297 (Patent 10,368,155 B2)
`IPR2021-00612 (Patent 10,206,025 B2)
`IPR2021-00680 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`__________
`
`Before KARL D. EASTHOM, PATRICK R. SCANLON, DAVID C.
`MCKONE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and NORMAN H. BEAMER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.1
`
`PER CURIAM.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct Of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`1 The listed Administrative Patent Judges collectively preside over all three
`proceedings, not over each of the proceedings.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00297; IPR2021-00612; IPR2021-00680
`Patents 10,368,155 B2; 10,206,025 B2; 10,469,934 B2
`
`The Board conducted a teleconference on January 5, 2022, after
`
`Patent Owner requested a teleconference via email to request filing a motion
`to terminate the three proceedings due to Petitioner’s alleged failure to name
`a real party-in-interest in each proceeding. During the teleconference, Patent
`Owner agreed that if Petitioner identifies Michael J. Pelland, who is a
`consulting expert for Petitioner in pending district court litigation and a
`listed inventor on the challenged patents, as a real party-in-interest (without
`admitting that he is in fact a real party-in-interest) to the proceedings, it
`would moot the issue. See Proppant Express Investments, LLC v. Oren
`Techs., LLC, IPR2017-01917, Paper 86 at 14–16 (PTAB Feb. 13, 2019)
`(precedential) (denying patent owner’s motion to dismiss based on a similar
`issue and sanctioning the naming of real parties-interest “without admitting
`they are in fact real parties-in-interest”). We make no determination as to
`whether Mr. Pelland is a real party-in-interest. After the teleconference,
`Petitioner filed Petitioner’s Second Updated Mandatory Notices in each
`proceeding identifying Mr. Pelland as agreed. Paper 31 (IPR2021-00297);
`Paper 23 (IPR2021-00612); Paper 22 (IPR2021-00680). Accordingly, the
`issue is moot.
`
`So Ordered.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00297; IPR2021-00612; IPR2021-00680
`Patents 10,368,155 B2; 10,206,025 B2; 10,469,934 B2
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER
`
`Michael N. Rader
`Gregory S. Nieberg
`WOLF GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C
`mrader-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`gnieberg-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`Mark G. Knedeisen Ragae
`M. Ghabrial
`Michelle Weaver
`Laurén Shuttleworth Murray
`Brian P. Bozzo
`K&L GATES LLP
`mark.knedeisen@klgates.com
`ragae.ghabrial@klgates.com
`michelle.weaver@klgates.com
`lauren.murray@klgates.com
`brian.bozzo@klgates.com
`
`3
`
`