`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MASIMO CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2022-01465
`U.S. Patent 10,687,745
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-01465
`Attorney Docket: 50095-0045IP3
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a), Petitioner, Apple Inc., hereby submits this
`
`Request for Oral Argument on all of the instituted grounds of unpatentability of
`
`claims 2-6, 8, 10-14, 17, 19, and 21-26 of U.S. Patent No. 10,687,745.
`
`The grounds and issues disputed in the present proceeding (IPR2022-01465)
`
`substantially overlap those in related proceeding IPR2022-01291, and given this
`
`overlap, Petitioner respectfully requests that the hearings for these two proceedings
`
`be consolidated to a single hearing at which the parties would be permitted to
`
`address issues from both proceedings. Petitioner requests 75 minutes per side of
`
`oral argument time for a consolidated hearing and requests that the hearing be
`
`conducted virtually by videoconference. Petitioner respectfully requests that the
`
`parties be afforded equal time to present at the hearing regardless of the total
`
`hearing time that the Board may authorize.
`
`Petitioner specifically requests authorization to address at least the following
`
`issues at the hearing, without waiving consideration of any issue not listed below:
`
`1. Obviousness of claims 2-3, 5-6, 8, 10-12, and 14 in Ground 1A based
`
`on the teachings of Iwamiya in view of Sarantos;
`
`2. Obviousness of claims 4, 17, 19, and 21-26 in Ground 1B based on
`
`the teachings of Iwamiya in view of Sarantos and Venkatraman;
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-01465
`Attorney Docket: 50095-0045IP3
`
`3. Obviousness of claims 2, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-14, 17, and 19 in Ground
`
`2A based on the teachings of Sarantos in view of Shie;
`
`4. Obviousness of claims 3-4, 17, 19, and 21-26 in Ground 2B based on
`
`the teachings of Sarantos in view of Shie and Venkatraman;
`
`5. Obviousness of claim 12 in Ground 2C based on the teachings of
`
`Sarantos in view of Shie and Savant;
`
`6. Any claim construction issues;
`
`7. Any procedural and/or evidentiary issues;
`
`8. Rebuttal to Patent Owner’s presentation on all matters; and
`
`9. Any additional issues on which the Board seeks clarification.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: September 22, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`/Nicholas W. Stephens/
`Nicholas Stephens, Reg. No. 74,320
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`T: 202-783-5070
`F: 877-769-7945
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2022-01465
`Attorney Docket: 50095-0045IP3
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.6(e)(4), the undersigned certifies that on September
`
`22, 2023, a complete and entire copy of this Petitioner’s Request for Oral
`
`Argument were provided via email, to the Patent Owner by serving the email
`
`correspondence address of record as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Brian C. Claassen (Reg. No. 63,051)
`Carol Pitzel Cruz (Reg. No. 61,224)
`Daniel C. Kiang (Reg. No. 79,631)
`Jeremiah S. Helm (Pro Hac Vice)
`
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
`2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
`Irvine, CA 92614
`Tel.: (949) 760-0404
`Fax: (949) 760-9502
`
`E-mail: AppleIPR745-3@knobbe.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Crena Pacheco/
`Crena Pacheco
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`pacheco@fr.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`