`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
` Paper: 9
`Entered: September 28, 2022
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MASIMO CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2022-01271 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01272 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01273 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01274 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01275 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01276 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01291 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01292 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01465 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01466 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)1
`
`
`
`
`Before JOSIAH C. COCKS, NEIL T. POWELL, JAMES A. TARTAL, and
`ROBERT A. POLLOCK, Administrative Patent Judges.2
`
`COCKS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order applies to the above-listed proceedings. We exercise our
`discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not
`authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`2 The panel has not been expanded for any of the noted proceedings. The
`listing of four judges accounts for variation in paneling as between the
`proceedings.
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01271 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01272 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01273 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01274 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01275 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01276 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01291 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01292 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01465 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01466 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`1. Introduction
`A conference call was held on September 23, 2022, between counsel
`for the respective parties and Judges Cocks, Powell, and Tartal.3 Petitioner,
`Apple Inc., was represented by Daniel Smith and Karl Renner. Patent
`Owner, Massimo Corporation, was represented by Jacob Peterson and
`Jeremiah Helm. The purpose of the call was to discuss Patent Owner’s
`request to file a motion for additional discovery under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.51(b)(2) in each of the noted proceedings.
`
`2. Discussion
`During the call, Patent Owner expressed that it was seeking, as a part
`of its requested motion for additional discovery, to obtain information
`relevant to objective indicia of non-obviousness. Patent Owner explained
`that such information had been identified in publicly available materials as a
`part of a related, ongoing International Trade Commission (ITC) proceeding,
`
`
`3 Judge Pollock is a panel member on two of the noted proceedings but was
`unavailable for the conference call.
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01271 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01272 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01273 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01274 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01275 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01276 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01291 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01292 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01465 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01466 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`
`but that the material, itself, was not publicly available. Petitioner indicated
`that it opposed Patent Owner’s request.
`Generally, our rules contemplate that matters of discovery, if
`applicable, emerge in a proceeding once a panel has determined that
`institution of a trial is warranted. Here, a determination whether to institute
`a trial in any of the noted proceedings has not yet been made. During the
`call, we noted that Patent Owner’s request, at this stage, appeared to be
`premature. Patent Owner acknowledged that its request likely was
`premature. Additionally, both parties indicated that the material sought by
`Patent Owner was presently the subject of a protective order in the relevant
`ITC proceeding. Patent Owner indicated that it had filed a motion in that
`ITC proceeding to amend the protective order to allow for submission of the
`pertinent material in these inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Both
`parties acknowledged that the ITC’s determination as to the request to
`amend the relevant protective order may have an impact on Patent Owner’s
`request to file a motion for additional discovery.
`Given the circumstances present here, we deny Patent Owner’s
`request to file a motion for additional discovery in any of the noted IPR
`proceedings. In the event of a change in circumstances, Patent Owner may
`renew its request at a later time.
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01271 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01272 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01273 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01274 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01275 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01276 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01291 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01292 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01465 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01466 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`
`
`3. Order
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request to file a motion for additional
`discovery in any of the noted IPR proceedings is denied without prejudice.
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Andrew Patrick
`Daniel D. Smith
`Hyun Jin In
`Grace Kim
`Gretchen DeVries
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`IPR50095-0042IP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`patrick@fr.com
`in@fr.com
`gkim@fr.com
`dsmith@fr.com
`devries@fr.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01271 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01272 (Patent 10,912,501 B2)
`IPR2022-01273 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01274 (Patent 10,912,502 B2)
`IPR2022-01275 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01276 (Patent 10,945,648 B2)
`IPR2022-01291 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01292 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01465 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`IPR2022-01466 (Patent 10,687,745 B1)
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Stephen W. Larson
`Jarom D. Kesler
`Irfan A. Lateef
`Brian C. Claassen
`Jacob L. Peterson
`Knobbe, Martens, Olson, & Bear, LLP
`2swl@knobbe.com
`2jzk@knobbe.com
`2ial@knobbe.com
`2bcc@knobbe.com
`2jup@knobbe.com
`
`
`