throbber
Philip Wang <pwang@raklaw.com>
`From:
`Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 9:16 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`
`Cc: AXF-PTAB <AXF-PTAB@fr.com>; Reza Mirzaie <rmirzaie@raklaw.com>; holt2@fr.com; Usman Khan <khan@fr.com>; RAK Vivato team <rak_vivato@raklaw.com>
`
`‘Subject:
`Re: 1PR2022-00367 - Regarding Oral Hearing
`
`
`
`Dear Honorable Board:
`The parties have conferredas instructed bythe Board in the scheduling order and Ms, Goldschlager’s March 13th email and submit this joint response,
`In view ofthis recent development and because the scheduling orderindicates that the parties cannotstipulate
`Patent Owner(XR) and Petitioners (HP, Apple) would liketo notify the Board that the parties have made progresstowards a settlement agreement although no written settlementis currently in place.
`to extend the date ofthe oral hearing, Patent Owner requests the Boardto grant a three (3) week extensionforthe oral hearing. Petitioners do not opposethis request. Good cause exists for this request becausethe additional timemayallow a written settlementto be agreed upon and signed bythe parties,
`thereby obviatingthe need foran oral hearing and savingtheparties’ and the Board’s resources.
`If and whenanoral hearingis conducted, the parties have agreed to conductthe oral hearing through videoconference.
`HfYour Honors would like to discussthis request overa conference call, the parties are available at the following times:
`‘© Monday, March 20, 2023: 3-5 pm EST
`
`‘+
`Tuesday, March 21, 2023:
`2:30-5 pm EST
`
`The parties also request the Board to provide instructions whethertheparties should file a paperincludingthis request and the parties’ response to Ms. Goldschlager’s email.
`Respectfully submitted,
`Philip Wang onbehalf of Patent Owner, XR Communications
`Usman Khan on behalf of Petitioners, Apple and HP
`
`On Mar13, 2023,at 1:32 PM, Trials <Irials@USPTO.GOV> wrote:
`Counsel,
`From the Board—
`
`In the Scheduling Orderforthis proceeding, we stated that the parties should meet and conferto decide ifthe Oral Hearing wasto be conducte:
`person or by videoconference. Paper11, 6. Only Petitioner requested an in-person hearing. Paper 25, 2. The
`parties were alsoto meet and conferand decide iftheywantthe hearing at the USPTOoffices in Alexandria, Virginia or DallasTexas, and notify the Board. Paper11, 6. The parties have not doneso. So, the parties shall meet and conferto decide 1)ifthe Oral
`Hearingwill be conducted in-person or by videoconference, and 2)ifin-person, whetherthey wantthe hearing conducted at the USPTOoffices in Alexandria, Virginia or Dallas, Texas, The parties shall file a paperin this proceeding providingthis information no
`laterthan March 17, 2023.
`Regards,
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 3001
`Exhibit 3001
`
`

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