`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 8
`Date: February 20, 2024
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONIC SCO., LTD,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`SLYDE ANALYTICS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2024-00006 (Patent 8,588,033 B2)
`IPR2024-00040 (Patent 9,804,678 B2)
` IPR2024-00041 (Patent 10,198,085 B2)1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, ST. JOHN COURTENAY III, and
`JOHN F. HORVATH, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`1 We use this combined caption because the same issue is involved in all
`three cases. The parties are not authorized to file a combined paper with a
`combined caption.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00006 (Patent 8,588,033 B2)
`IPR2024-00040 (Patent 9,804,678 B2)
`IPR2024-00041 (Patent 10,198,085 B2)
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`A conference call was held on February 20, 2024, between respective
`counsel for the parties and Judges Lee, Courtenay III, and Horvath, in
`response to Petitioner’s email of February 8, 2024 (Ex. 3001). Petitioner
`stated: “[I]f the Board would prefer Petitioner to address [Fintiv] issue in a
`paper,” Petitioner requests authorization to address Patent Owner’s
`arguments for discretionary denial under Section 314(a) in IPR2024-00006,
`IPR2024-00040, IPR2024-00041. Ex. 3001.
`
`During the conference call, the panel heard arguments from both
`parties. For reasons discussed below, in this proceeding, Petitioner’s request
`is granted.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`The filing of a preliminary reply is not automatically authorized by
`the rules. “A petitioner may seek leave to file a reply to the preliminary
`response in accordance with §§ 42.23 and 42.24(c). Any such request must
`make a showing of good cause.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.108(c).
`With regard to discretionary denial under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a),
`Petitioner indicates in its email that it has filed a Sotera-type stipulation and
`that that should moot the issue. Ex. 3001. However, in the conference call,
`counsel for Patent Owner represented that Patent Owner does not withdraw
`its request for discretionary denial under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). Accordingly,
`there is good cause to allow Petitioner an opportunity to respond to Patent
`Owner’s arguments under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00006 (Patent 8,588,033 B2)
`IPR2024-00040 (Patent 9,804,678 B2)
`IPR2024-00041 (Patent 10,198,085 B2)
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s request to file a preliminary reply is
`granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the preliminary reply is limited to three
`pages and due February 27, 2024; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is authorized to file a
`preliminary sur-reply, limited to three pages and due March 1, 2024.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00006 (Patent 8,588,033 B2)
`IPR2024-00040 (Patent 9,804,678 B2)
`IPR2024-00041 (Patent 10,198,085 B2)
`
`For Petitioner:
`
`William M. Fink
`Benjamin M. Haber
`Brian Cook
`Nicholas Whilt
`O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
`tfink@omm.com
`bhaber@omm.com
`bcook@omm.com
`nwhilt@omm.com
`
`
`
`For Patent Owner:
`
`Peter Lambrianakos
`Vincent J. Rubino
`Enrique W. Iturralde
`Richard Cowell
`Jacob Ostling
`FABRICANT LLP
`plambrianakos@fabricantllp.com
`vrubino@fabricantllp.com
`eiturralde@fabricantllp.com
`rcowell@fabricantllp.com
`jostling@fabricantllp.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
