Paper 6
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: October 3, 2024
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PROXENSE, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Patent 8,352,730 B2)
`IPR2024-00233 (Patent 8,886,954 B1)
`IPR2024-00234 (Patent 9,298,905 B1)
`IPR2024-00782 (Patent 8,646,042 B1)
`IPR2024-01318 (Patent 8,646,042 B1)
`IPR2024-01319 (Patent 9,679,289 B1)
`IPR2024-01320 (Patent 10,073,960 B1)1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before THU A. DANG, KEVIN F. TURNER, DAVID C. MCKONE, and
`NORMAN H. BEAMER, Administrative Patent Judges.2
`
`MCKONE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`1 The combined caption is for administrative convenience only and does not
`indicate that the above-listed proceedings have been joined. The parties are
`not authorized to use this caption without express permission from the
`Board.
`2 The four listed judges represent overlapping panels on several proceedings.
`This is not an expanded panel.
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: October 3, 2024
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PROXENSE, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Patent 8,352,730 B2)
`IPR2024-00233 (Patent 8,886,954 B1)
`IPR2024-00234 (Patent 9,298,905 B1)
`IPR2024-00782 (Patent 8,646,042 B1)
`IPR2024-01318 (Patent 8,646,042 B1)
`IPR2024-01319 (Patent 9,679,289 B1)
`IPR2024-01320 (Patent 10,073,960 B1)1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before THU A. DANG, KEVIN F. TURNER, DAVID C. MCKONE, and
`NORMAN H. BEAMER, Administrative Patent Judges.2
`
`MCKONE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`1 The combined caption is for administrative convenience only and does not
`indicate that the above-listed proceedings have been joined. The parties are
`not authorized to use this caption without express permission from the
`Board.
`2 The four listed judges represent overlapping panels on several proceedings.
`This is not an expanded panel.
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Pat. 8,352,730 B2); IPR2024-00233 (Pat. 8,886,954 B1);
`IPR2024-00234 (Pat. 9,298,905 B1); IPR2024-00782 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1);
`IPR2024-01318 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1); IPR2024-01319 (Pat. 9,679,289 B1);
`IPR2024-01320 (Pat. 10,073,960 B1)
`
`
`BACKGROUND
`Apple Inc. (“Apple”) e-mailed the Board to request a conference call
`to discuss its motions for joinder filed in IPR2024-01398 and IPR2024-
`01399. Apple seeks to join IPR2024-00573 and IPR2024-00782,
`respectively. On October 1, 2024, the Board conducted a conference call
`with counsel for Apple, Google LLC (“Google”), Microsoft Corporation
`(“Microsoft”), and Proxense, LLC (“Proxense” or “Patent Owner”) to
`discuss how to timely manage the proceedings. A court reporter was not
`present on the call. This Order serves as the official record of the
`teleconference.
`
`DISCUSSION
`In IPR2024-01398 and IPR2024-01399, Apple seeks to join IPR2024-
`00573 and IPR2024-00782. However, there are several pending motions for
`joinder filed in the above-listed proceedings. We raised the additional cases
`beyond IPR2024-01398 and IPR2024-01399 in order to manage these cases
`efficiently and because counsel for all four parties attended the
`teleconference.3 A table summarizing the motions for joinder is below.
`
`Petitioner
`
`Proceeding
`IPR2024-01318
`IPR2024-01319
`
`3 We reminded counsel for Patent Owner to make formal appearances in,
`and submit mandatory notices in, IPR2024-01318, IPR2024-01319,
`IPR2024-01320, IPR2024-01398, and IPR2024-01399. See 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 42.8, 42.10(a)–(b).
`
`Proceeding to join Challenged Patent
`IPR2024-00573
`8,646,042 B1
`IPR2024-00407
`9,679,289 B1
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Pat. 8,352,730 B2); IPR2024-00233 (Pat. 8,886,954 B1);
`IPR2024-00234 (Pat. 9,298,905 B1); IPR2024-00782 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1);
`IPR2024-01318 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1); IPR2024-01319 (Pat. 9,679,289 B1);
`IPR2024-01320 (Pat. 10,073,960 B1)
`
`
`Proceeding
`IPR2024-01320
`IPR2024-01326
`IPR2024-01327
`IPR2024-01328
`IPR2024-01333
`IPR2024-01334
`IPR2024-01335
`IPR2024-01398
`IPR2024-01399
`
`Proceeding to join Challenged Patent
`IPR2024-00405
`10,073,960 B1
`IPR2024-00232
`8,352,730 B2
`IPR2024-00233
`8,886,954 B1
`IPR2024-00234
`9,298,905 B1
`IPR2024-00232
`8,352,730 B2
`IPR2024-00233
`8,886,954 B1
`IPR2024-00234
`9,298,905 B1
`IPR2024-00573
`8,646,042 B1
`IPR2024-00782
`8,646,042 B1
`
`Petitioner
`Microsoft
`Microsoft
`Microsoft
`Apple
`Apple
`Apple
`Apple
`Apple
`
`During the conference call, counsel for Apple, Google, Microsoft, and
`Patent Owner discussed the pending motions for joinder.
`Apple explained that it was sued by Patent Owner more than ten
`months after Google and Microsoft and could have filed its own independent
`petitions for inter partes review. However, Apple represents that it decided
`to file joinder petitions seeking inter partes review with accompanying
`motions for joinder in order to save the parties’ and the Board’s resources.
`Consistent with its Motions for Joinder, Apple reiterated that it intends to
`take an understudy role in the proceedings it seeks to join unless the other
`petitioner(s) are dismissed from the proceedings. Apple also represented
`that it included stipulations under Sand Revolution in each of its joinder
`petitions to indicate that will not pursue the grounds raised in its petition in
`the parallel district court litigation with respect to the claims for which trial
`is instituted if the proceeding is instituted and joinder is granted. See Sand
`Revolution II, LLC v. Continental Intermodal Group–Trucking LLC,
`IPR2019- 01393, Paper 24 at 7 (PTAB Jun. 16, 2020).
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Pat. 8,352,730 B2); IPR2024-00233 (Pat. 8,886,954 B1);
`IPR2024-00234 (Pat. 9,298,905 B1); IPR2024-00782 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1);
`IPR2024-01318 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1); IPR2024-01319 (Pat. 9,679,289 B1);
`IPR2024-01320 (Pat. 10,073,960 B1)
`
`
`Apple filed a document ranking its joinder petitions and motions for
`joinder in IPR2024-01398 and IPR2024-01399. Apple indicated that its
`joinder petition and motion for joinder in IPR2024-01399 takes precedence
`over its joinder petition and motion for joinder in IPR2024-01398 if the
`Board determines that it will only institute one of the joinder petitions in
`IPR2024-01398 and IPR2024-01399.
`Google stated that it filed its joinder petitions and motions for joinder
`conditionally and with rankings. Google requests that its motions for joinder
`be held in abeyance until, and only if, its earlier-filed petitions are denied.
`Google also indicated that its earlier-filed petitions take precedence over its
`joinder petitions. See, e.g., IPR2024-01318, Paper 4 (Petitioner’s
`Supplemental Paper and Notice Ranking Petitions), 1.4
`Microsoft explained that it filed its joinder petitions and motions for
`joinder conditionally. Microsoft requests that the Board grant its motions
`for joinder if, and only if, the Board denies institution of its earlier-filed
`petitions. See, e.g., IPR2024-01326, Paper 2 (Petitioner’s Conditional
`Motion for Joinder), 1.5
`Patent Owner stated that it does not oppose joinder in the Apple
`joinder proceedings6 and agreed that we should proceed to grant those
`
`
`4 Google filed similar statements in IPR2024-01319 and IPR2024-01320.
`5 Microsoft filed similar statements in IPR2024-01327 and IPR2024-01328.
`6 We do not yet address Apple’s Joinder Motion in IPR2024-01399, as we
`have not determined yet whether to institute a trial in the proceeding Apple
`seeks to join, IPR2024-00782.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Pat. 8,352,730 B2); IPR2024-00233 (Pat. 8,886,954 B1);
`IPR2024-00234 (Pat. 9,298,905 B1); IPR2024-00782 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1);
`IPR2024-01318 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1); IPR2024-01319 (Pat. 9,679,289 B1);
`IPR2024-01320 (Pat. 10,073,960 B1)
`
`motions. We infer from this that Patent Owner will not file preliminary
`responses in the Apple joinder proceedings.
`Patent Owner has concerns with Google’s motions for joinder because
`the parties have exchanged expert reports in the parallel district court
`litigation and a trial is scheduled to occur in February 2025. Patent Owner
`stated that a trial is scheduled for May 2025 in the parallel district court
`litigation involving Microsoft. Patent Owner and Google agreed to meet and
`confer to discuss whether they can resolve any opposition Patent Owner
`might have to Google’s motions for joinder.
`Microsoft and Patent Owner also agreed to meet and confer to discuss
`whether they can resolve any opposition Patent Owner might have to
`Microsoft’s motions for joinder.
`Patent Owner represented that it intends to file requests for adverse
`judgment in the proceedings challenging U.S. Patent No. 9,298,905 B1. We
`informed the parties that we will address any such requests once Patent
`Owner files them. We requested that the parties provide us a with a status
`update on each of the above-listed proceedings and meet and confer to
`attempt to resolve any disputes.
`
`
`ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the parties provide the Board with a status update
`summary of each of the above-listed proceedings via email to
`Trials@uspto.gov no later than October 8, 2024.
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00232 (Pat. 8,352,730 B2); IPR2024-00233 (Pat. 8,886,954 B1);
`IPR2024-00234 (Pat. 9,298,905 B1); IPR2024-00782 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1);
`IPR2024-01318 (Pat. 8,646,042 B1); IPR2024-01319 (Pat. 9,679,289 B1);
`IPR2024-01320 (Pat. 10,073,960 B1)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`Erika Arner
`Kara Specht
`Cory Bell
`Shawn Chang
`Safiya Aguilar
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
`erika.arner@finnegan.com
`kara.specht@finnegan.com
`cory.bell@finnegan.com
`shawn.chang@finnegan.com
`safiya.aguilar@finnegan.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`David L Hecht
`James Zak
`Hecht Partners LLP
`dhecht@hechtpartners.com
`jzak@hechtpartners.com
`
`
`6
`
`
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
