`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper 8
`Entered: August 18, 2021
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NANT HOLDINGS IP, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-01080
`Patent 8,463,030 B2
`____________
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, and
`STEPHEN E. BELISLE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion to Submit Corrected Petition
`37 C.F.R § 42.104(c)
`
`
`I. BACKGROUND
`Bank of America, N.A. (“Petitioner”) filed a petition seeking inter
`partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,463,030 B2. Paper 1. With Board
`authorization, Petitioner filed a motion to correct clerical errors in its
`petition and to file a corrected petition. Paper 7 (“Motion”). Petitioner
`represents that the Motion is unopposed. Motion 2, 7.
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01080
`Patent 8,463,030 B2
`
`
`Petitioner contends that “[n]o new prior art or new substance is being
`added” by the corrections. Motion 1. Petitioner further contends “there are
`no material changes to the analysis within the Petition.” Id. Further,
`Petitioner contends “since Petitioner’s proposed correction will not change
`the substance of the analysis within the Petition, the Patent Owner is not
`required to do any additional analysis on the merits, or otherwise, in its
`preliminary response once these errors are corrected.” Id.
`Petitioner provides a summary of the proposed corrections at pages 2–
`5 of the Motion. Petitioner explains that “[t]he errors are based on incorrect
`dates of certain docket entries or procedural events in the district court
`proceeding, incomplete or incorrect supporting citations, and minor
`typographical errors.” Motion 5. Petitioner further explains that “[t]he
`proposed changes correct the errors for clarity.” Id. Petitioner provides an
`explanation for each of the proposed changes. Id. at 6.
`II. DISCUSSION
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 104(c), “[a] motion may be filed that seeks to
`correct a clerical or typographical mistake in the petition.” Further, “[t]he
`moving party has the burden of proof to establish that it is entitled to the
`requested relief.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.20 (c).
`We determine that Petitioner has demonstrated sufficiently that the
`Motion should be granted. First, the errors appear to be clerical or
`typographical. Motion 6. For example, two involve incorrect dates for
`docket entries. Id. at 3. Several others involve incorrect or incomplete
`citations for which the context suggests the correct information. Id. at 4–5.
`Others involve minor misquotations or misspellings. Id. at 3, 5.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01080
`Patent 8,463,030 B2
`
`
`Petitioner demonstrates that it acted diligently in seeking authorization
`to make the corrections. See Motion 2. Moreover, it does not appear that
`the proposed corrections will add new prior art or substantive arguments to
`the Petition or appreciably increase its length. Id. at 7. We find that
`Petitioner has carried its burden of showing that the Motion should be
`granted.
`III. ORDER
`It is, therefore,
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is authorized to file a corrected
`Petition within ten days of the date of this Order; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the only corrections to the Petition
`authorized are those shown in the table appearing at pages 2–5 of the
`Motion; no other corrections to the Petition are permitted.
`
` PETITIONER:
`Dustin Edwards
`Michael Tomasulo
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`dedwares@winston.com
`mtomasulo@winston.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`James Glass
`Todd Briggs
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
` & SULLIVAN, LLP
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`toddbriggs@quinnemanuel.com
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
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
