`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 5
`Entered: February 9, 2022
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`LOGANTREE LP,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2022-00037
`IPR2022-000401
`Patent 6,059,576
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before, PATRICK R. SCANLON, MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, and
`JAMES A. WORTH, Administrative Patent Judges.
`SCANLON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order pertains to both cases. Thus, we exercise our discretion to issue
`one Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not authorized to use this
`style heading in subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00037
`IPR2022-00040
`Patent 6,059,576
`In an email to the Board on January 31, 2022, Patent Owner indicated
`that its patent counsel had recently and suddenly passed away and stated that
`the parties would like to discuss potential extensions with the Board. A
`conference call was held on February 4, 2022, between respective counsel
`for the parties and Judges Scanlon, Weatherly, and Worth. Attorneys Karl
`Renner and Andrew Patrick represented Petitioner, Apple. Inc., and
`Attorneys James Sherry and Aaron Dekle appeared on behalf of Patent
`Owner, LoganTree LP.
`During the call, Mr. Sherry requested a 90-day extension of the
`deadline to file the Patent Owner Preliminary Responses in view of the
`unexpected passing of patent counsel. Mr. Sherry indicated that Patent
`Owner was working diligently to engage patent counsel and that Petitioner
`did not object to the requested extension. Counsel for Petitioner confirmed
`that Petitioner did not object to the extension, as long as an equal extension
`is granted in a related district court proceeding. Counsel indicated that a
`motion for such an extension recently had been filed in that proceeding.
`Office regulations state a preliminary response must be filed no later
`than three months after a notice granting a filing date to the petition.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.107(b). In each of these proceedings, the Notice of Filing
`Date Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary
`Response was entered on December 8, 2021. IPR2022-00037, Paper 4;
`IPR2022-00040, Paper 4. Accordingly, the Patent Owner Preliminary
`Response in each proceeding would be due March 8, 2022.
`Requests for time extensions “must be supported by a showing of
`good cause.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c)(2). Upon consideration of the facts of this
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00037
`IPR2022-00040
`Patent 6,059,576
`situation, we find that good cause exists to grant the requested 90-day
`extension to file the Patent Owner Preliminary Response in each proceeding.
`Accordingly, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the due date for Patent Owner to file its Preliminary
`Response in each of IPR2022-00037 and IPR2022-00040 is changed to
`June 6, 2022.
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Walter Renner
`Andrew Patrick
`Kim Leung
`Usman Khan
`FISH & RICAHRDSON P.C.
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`patrick@fr.com
`leung@fr.com
`khan@fr.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`LOGAN TREE, LP
`c/o Theodore L. Brann
`PO Box 2345
`Boerne, TX 78006
`
`
`
`
`
`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
