throbber
From:
`To:
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`Date:
`
`Matthew Dowd
`Trials
`Scott W. Hejny; ParusGoogleIPR; Robert Scheffel; Elliot Gee; James Quigley; Ari Rafilson; Kim Jackson; Hogan,
`Caitlin P.; EHunt-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com; Haber, Ben
`IPR2022-00805 - Google LLC v. Parus Holdings Inc.
`Friday, October 13, 2023 9:33:40 PM
`
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE SOURCE before
`responding, clicking on links, or opening attachments.
`
`Dear Honorable Board,
`
`We received the Board’s October 11 order setting an oral hearing for October 24, 2023, and we are
`responding on behalf Patent Owner and Mr. Hejny (“Respondents”).
`
`1) Location of Hearing. Respondents request that the hearing be held in-person. In terms of
`location, Respondents request that the hearing to be held at either USPTO headquarters in
`Alexandria, Virginia or the Denver, Colorado Regional Office, with a preference for the former if the
`Board is willing to accommodate.
`
`2) Attendees. Respondents expect that John Campbell (lead counsel), Scott Hejny, Matthew J.
`Dowd, and Robert J. Scheffel will attend the hearing in person. Additional counsel and
`representatives for Parus may attend by video. Respondents’ counsel Mr. Dowd will present
`argument on the Order to Show Cause for Patent Owner and Mr. Hejny.
`
`3) Request to Reschedule. Respondents respectfully request that the hearing be rescheduled in
`order to accommodate several pre-existing commitments. Respondents respectfully request that
`the hearing be rescheduled to any day of October 25-27 or any day the week of October 30. As
`noted below based on the parties’ correspondence yesterday and today, Petitioner stated that it
`“take[s] no position on [Respondents’] request to move the hearing date” (with certain qualifiers),
`and Petitioner did not object to rescheduling the hearing to Wednesday, October 25, 2023.
`
`First, lead counsel John Campbell has a family commitment to his son on October 24. His son is a
`senior in high school. His son set a goal to qualify for the Texas state cross country meet for the first
`time and has been training hard to accomplish that goal. The state qualifying meet for his son is on
`October 24th. Lead counsel understands the seriousness of this hearing and proceeding, will attend
`the hearing in person, and would very much appreciate the opportunity to support his son as well.
`
`Second, Respondents’ counsel Mr. Dowd and his partner Robert J. Scheffel have several pressing
`deadlines in numerous appellate and litigation matters, including preparing reply briefs for four
`Federal Circuit appeals in which the responses are due October 18. Additionally, Mr. Dowd is
`currently scheduled for personal travel from October 19-22.
`
`Undersigned counsel conferred through email correspondence with Petitioner’s counsel on the
`request to reschedule. As noted above, Petitioner stated that it “take[s] no position on
`(cid:44)(cid:51)(cid:53)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:27)(cid:19)(cid:24)(cid:3)
`(cid:40)(cid:91)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:22)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:21)
`
`

`

`[Respondents’] request to move the hearing date,” (with certain qualifiers), and Petitioner did not
`object to rescheduling the hearing to Wednesday, October 25, 2023.
`
`Petitioner did assert that it intended to participate in the hearing, and it stated that Google’s lead
`counsel and “other representatives that Google intends to have at the hearing” are not available on
`October 26-27 and 30-31, though Petitioner did not identify the “other representatives” and did not
`confirm whether all of Petitioner’s attorneys are completely unavailable, even for participating by
`video or telephone.
`
`As noted below, the parties are available October 17 or 18, should a conference call be necessary.
`
`4) Request for Leave to File a Ten-Page Reply. We received Petitioner’s Response to Patent
`Owner’s and Scott W. Hejny’s Response to the Order to Show Cause on September 29, 2023. See
`Paper 30 and Exhibits 1062 and 1063. Petitioner’s submission contains a number of factual
`assertions (as well as the absence of information) addressing Respondents’ submissions.
`Respondents respectfully request leave to file a ten-page reply to address these factual assertions
`and related issues, to be filed in advance of the hearing.
`
`The parties have conferred through telephone calls and written correspondence. Petitioner opposes
`this request.
`
`The parties are available October 17 or 18, should a conference call be necessary.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Matthew J. Dowd
`Counsel for Respondents Parus Holdings Inc. and Scott W. Hejny
`
`Matthew J. Dowd
`Dowd Scheffel PLLC
`1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
`Suite 1025
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`Direct: (202) 573-3853
`Office: (202) 559-9175
`mdowd@dowdscheffel.com
`http://www.dowdscheffel.com
`http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewdowd
`
`
`
`

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