`From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`
`Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Tuesday, April 12, 2022 8:26 AM
`Jeremy Monaldo; Trials
`Girgis, Diana; IPR39843-0117IP1; PTAB Inbound; AXF-PTAB; Hyun Jin In; Dandalides,
`George; Hayes, Jennifer
`RE: IPR2022-00222; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v. MEMORYWEB, LLC;
`Request for Reply to Preliminary Response
`
`[This email originated outside of F&R.]
`
`Counsel: The panel has considered Petitioner’s request. No conference call is needed at this
`time. The panel authorizes Petitioner to file a five page preliminary reply limited to
`addressing Patent Owner’s arguments related to discretionary denial under General Plastic
`and Fintiv due within five business days of receipt of this email. No other issues should be
`addressed. Patent Owner is authorized to file a five page preliminary sur‐reply also limited to
`addressing these issues. Patent Owner’s preliminary sur‐reply is due within five business days
`of filing of Petitioner’s preliminary reply. Petitioner should file a copy of this email exchange
`as an exhibit with its preliminary reply.
`
`Thank you,
`
`Maria King
`Deputy Chief Clerk for Trials
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`703‐756‐1288
`
`From: Jeremy Monaldo <Monaldo@fr.com>
`Sent: Monday, April 11, 2022 10:39 AM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: Girgis, Diana <dgirgis@nixonpeabody.com>; IPR39843‐0117IP1 <IPR39843‐0117IP1@fr.com>; PTAB Inbound
`<PTABInbound@fr.com>; AXF‐PTAB <AXF‐PTAB@fr.com>; Hyun Jin In <in@fr.com>; Dandalides, George
`<gdandalides@nixonpeabody.com>; Hayes, Jennifer <jenhayes@nixonpeabody.com>
`Subject: IPR2022‐00222; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. et al. v. MEMORYWEB, LLC; Request for Reply to Preliminary
`Response
`
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE SOURCE before responding, clicking on
`links, or opening attachments.
`
`1
`
`SAMSUNG 1038
`SAMSUNG v. MEMORYWEB
`IPR2022-00222
`
`
`
`Your Honors,
`
`In the preliminary response filed in IPR2022‐00222, MemoryWeb raised arguments related to discretionary denial under
`General Plastic and Fintiv and also provided analysis of requirements of the claimed people view in relation to the
`Okamura prior art. Samsung requests authorization to file a 10‐page reply to address these arguments from the
`preliminary response.
`
`
`MemoryWeb opposes the request as to the claim interpretation issue and related arguments, but does not oppose as to
`the discretionary denial issues provided MemoryWeb also is permitted an equal number of pages to respond in a Sur‐
`Reply. Samsung does not oppose a Sur‐Reply of equal length.
`
`
`Should the Board desire a conference call to discuss this request, the parties are available Wednesday any time after
`10:30 AM to 2 PM ET or after 3 PM ET, Thursday 10:30 AM – 1:00 PM ET, or Friday after 10:30 AM ET.
`
`
`Best Regards,
`Jeremy
`
`
`
`Jeremy Monaldo :: Principal :: Fish & Richardson P.C.
`+1 (202) 626-7717 direct :: Monaldo@fr.com
`fr.com :: Bio :: LinkedIn :: Twitter
`
`
`
`***************************************************************************************************
`*************************
`This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
`and privileged information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the
`intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
`message.
`***************************************************************************************************
`*************************
`
`2
`
`
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
