throbber
From:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`Date:
`
`Trials
`Jim Glass; Trials
`Thomas Pease; Gavin Snyder; QE-Taction-Apple; Kelly Hughes; ptab@eriseip.com; Jason Mudd
`RE: IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060 (Apple v. Taction Technology)
`Monday, February 28, 2022 11:25:34 AM
`
`Counsel: Because the stay order is already in evidence, the Panel does not authorize any
`additional briefing.
`
`Thank you,
`
`Maria King
`Deputy Chief Clerk for Trials
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`703-756-1288
`
`From: Jim Glass <jimglass@quinnemanuel.com>
`Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 6:02 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: Thomas Pease <thomaspease@quinnemanuel.com>; Gavin Snyder
`<gavinsnyder@quinnemanuel.com>; QE-Taction-Apple <qe-taction-apple@quinnemanuel.com>;
`Kelly Hughes <kelly.hughes@eriseip.com>; ptab@eriseip.com; Jason Mudd
`<jason.mudd@eriseip.com>
`Subject: RE: IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060 (Apple v. Taction Technology)
`
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE SOURCE before
`responding, clicking on links, or opening attachments.
`
`Your Honors,
`
`I am lead counsel for Patent Owner and write to further clarify our position on Petitioner’s request.
`
`It is Patent Owner’s position that additional briefing is not necessary as the district court’s stay order
`is already in evidence. Patent Owner, however, defers to the Board on this issue. Should the Board
`find additional briefing to be helpful and grants Petitioner’s request, Patent Owner respectfully
`requests that it be allowed to submit a sur-reply brief of the same number of pages and on the same
`timing as Petitioner’s reply brief.
`
`PO is available on the following dates and times for a call, should the Board require one:
`
`Tuesday, March 8, 10:30am-2:00PM
`Wednesday, March 9, 12:00-3:00
`
`IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060
`Ex. 3001
`
`

`

`Thursday, March 10, 12:30-3:00
`
`Respectfully,
`
`James Glass
`
`James M. Glass |Chair, Post-Grant Patent Practice| Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | 51 Madison
`Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10010 | Office: +1.212.849.7142|
`
`
`From: Adam Seitz <adam.seitz@eriseip.com>
`Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 2:05 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: QE-Taction-Apple <qe-taction-apple@quinnemanuel.com>; Kelly Hughes
`<kelly.hughes@eriseip.com>; ptab@eriseip.com; Jason Mudd <jason.mudd@eriseip.com>
`Subject: Re: IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060 (Apple v. Taction Technology)
`
`
`
`
`[EXTERNAL EMAIL from adam.seitz@eriseip.com]
`
`Your Honors,
`
`Petitioner Apple Inc. writes in connection with the above-mentioned IPRs (IPR2022-00057, -00058,
`-00059, -00060) to request authorization to file a short reply brief not to exceed 5 pages in each of
`these matters limited to Patent Owner’s arguments in its POPRs for discretionary denial under
`NHK/Fintiv. Petitioner submits that good cause exists because, as noted in the prior correspondence
`below, the district court has recently issued an order staying the co-pending litigation between the
`parties pending institution decisions in these matters. The stay order addresses both the trial date
`and the status of the work completed in the litigation. Patent Owner raised arguments regarding the
`stay motion in its POPR. Because the stay occurred after the filing of the Petitions in these matters
`the petitions were not able to address this fact. Petitioner has conferred with Patent Owner and
`Patent Owner indicated it would “defer to the Board’s judgment on this issue.”
`
`Counsel for Petitioner can be available for a telephone call at the Board’s convenience.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Adam Seitz
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner Apple
`
`
`
`
`On Jan 28, 2022, at 12:46 PM, Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV> wrote:
`
`Counsel: Petitioner is authorized to file the Joint Claim Construction Statement,
`
`

`

`but not the stay order. If Patent Owner files a Preliminary Response and requests
`discretionary denial under NHK/Fintiv, after meeting and conferring with Patent
`Owner, Petitioner can renew its request to file the stay order.
`
`Thank you,
`
`Maria King
`Deputy Chief Clerk for Trials
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`703-756-1288
`
`
`
`
`From: Adam Seitz <adam.seitz@eriseip.com>
`Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2022 5:50 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: qe-taction-apple@quinnemanuel.com; Kelly Hughes
`<kelly.hughes@eriseip.com>; ptab@eriseip.com; Jason Mudd
`<jason.mudd@eriseip.com>
`Subject: IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060 (Apple v. Taction Technology)
`
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE
`SOURCE before responding, clicking on links, or opening attachments.
`
`Your Honors:
`
`Counsel for Petitioner, Apple Inc., writes in connection with the above-referenced
`IPR matters (IPR2022-00057, -00058, -00059, -00060) to raise two items:
`
`1) First, Apple writes to notify the Board that the Court in the co-pending
`litigation between the parties (Case No. 21-cv-00812 pending in the U.S. District
`Court for the Southern District of California) has yesterday issued an order
`staying the litigation pending a decision from the Board on whether to institute
`these IPRs. Apple seeks authorization to file the district court’s order granting a
`stay as an exhibit to these proceedings.
`
`2) Second, Apple writes to request authorization to file as an exhibit with the
`Board a Joint Claim Construction Statement filed jointly by Apple and Patent
`Owner, Taction Technology, Inc., in the co-pending litigation between the parties.
`Apple makes this request to satisfy its duty of candor to inform the Board of any
`claim construction determinations by a Court as well as claim construction
`statements made by Petitioner or Patent Owner. Trial Practice Guide, (November
`2019 Update), 47, 49. Petitioner appreciates that the Trial Guide primarily focuses
`on submission of claim construction determinations and no judicial determination
`has yet been made in the parties’ co-pending lawsuit. However, out of an
`
`

`

`abundance of caution and in light of our duty of candor, Petitioner wants to make
`sure the Board has statements from the parties regarding claim construction that
`have been made of record in the litigation. Patent Owner has been contacted
`regarding this request to submit this exhibit and does not oppose this submission.
`Please confirm that Petitioner may be authorized to file the Joint Claim
`Construction Statement as an exhibit in each of these four IPR matters.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Adam Seitz
`Erise IP
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner Apple Inc.
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket