• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
189 results

LG Electronics, Inc. v. Straight Path IP Group, Inc.

Docket IPR2015-00198, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Oct. 31, 2014)
Bart Gerstenblith, Kalyan Deshpande, Trenton Ward, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
6009469
Petitioner LG Electronics, Inc.
Patent Owner Straight Path IP Group, Inc.
Assignee STRAIGHT PATH COMMUNICATIONS INC.
...
cite Cite Docket

Vonage Holdings Corporation, et al. v. Straight Path IP Group, Inc.

Docket IPR2014-01225, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Aug. 1, 2014)
Bart Gerstenblith, Kalyan Deshpande, Thomas Giannetti, Trenton Ward, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
6009469
Petitioner Vonage Holdings Corporation, et al.
Patent Owner Straight Path IP Group, Inc.
Assignee STRAIGHT PATH COMMUNICATIONS INC.
...
cite Cite Docket

57 Final Decision: Final Written Decision

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 57 Final Decision - Final Written Decision (P.T.A.B. May. 9, 2016)
Subsequent to Patent Owner’s Response and Petitioner’s Reply, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Straight Path IP Grp., Inc. v. Sipnet EU S.R.O., 806 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“Straight Path”).
The Federal Circuit further explained that “[i]t is not a reasonable interpretation of the claim language ... to say that it is satisfied by a query that asks only for registration information, regardless of its current accuracy.” Id.
Petitioner specifically argues that the Board has rejected similar arguments as those raised by Patent Owner and held that § 315(b) only covers civil actions brought in federal district court.
WINS discloses that in response to User Datagram Protocol (UDP) name queries, “a mapping in the database does not ensure that the related device is currently running.” Id. at 68.
Petitioner further argues that Pinard discloses a telephone application software program for use with a personal computer and a server, and provides a human machine interface (HMI).
cite Cite Document

56 Notice: Record of Oral Hearing

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 56 Notice - Record of Oral Hearing (P.T.A.B. Apr. 18, 2016)
MR. RAMANI: And to explain how we're intending to present argument today, I'm going to provide some introductory remarks and then address the import of the Federal Circuit's decision in Sipnet to the proceedings before this Panel.
But what they are focusing on now is what we would describe as edge corner cases that don't disrupt or change the fundamental fact that WINS and NetBIOS in tandem with Pinard render the instituted claims obvious.
JUDGE WARD: What about the earlier disclosure just above that in column 5, of a timestamping methodology for ensuring database accuracy, would you also include that as a relevant embodiment that satisfies the Federal Circuit's claim construction?
So back to paragraph 36: WINS and NetBIOS also disclose a mechanism for determining whether a process is online or connected to the computer network pursuant to Dr. Stubblebine's -- that's Patent Owner's expert -- construction.
MR. RAMANI: To this point that was put before you repeatedly -- and I know I started here and took a little bit of a detour -- about how any name-to- IP address mapping registered with the WINS server can be provided reliably as a response to a name query.
cite Cite Document

51 Notice: Order Trial Hearing 37 CFR 4270

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 51 Notice - Order Trial Hearing 37 CFR 4270 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 14, 2016)
Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s initial presentation, having available to it the entirety of its allotted argument time.
The oral argument will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
The parties must initiate a conference call with the Board by two business days prior to the hearing to resolve any dispute over the propriety of each party’s demonstrative exhibits.
Any dispute over the propriety of demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented two business days prior to the hearing will be considered waived.
The parties are reminded that the presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
cite Cite Document

46 Notice: Order Authorization to File Additional Briefing 37 CFR 425

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 46 Notice - Order Authorization to File Additional Briefing 37 CFR 425 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 5, 2016)

cite Cite Document

40 Notice: Decision Motion for Joinder

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 40 Notice - Decision Motion for Joinder (P.T.A.B. Nov. 10, 2015)

cite Cite Document

33 Order: Decision Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission

Document IPR2015-00198, No. 33 Order - Decision Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission (P.T.A.B. Aug. 4, 2015)

cite Cite Document
1 2 3 4 5 ... 12 13 14 >>