• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 24-38 of 112 results

4 Power of Attorney: Patent Owner Power of Attorney

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 4 Power of Attorney - Patent Owner Power of Attorney (P.T.A.B. Feb. 6, 2020)
AIA Trial Proceedings Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board
I hereby revoke all prior powers of attorney in this PTAB proceeding and appoint:
X Patent Trial and Appeal Board The Practitioner(s) associated with USPTO Customer No. 108491 as attorney(s) to prosecute proceedings before the
Name and Address of Real Party in Interest:
SEVEN Networks, LLC 2660 East End Boulevard South Marshall, TX 75672
cite Cite Document

1 Power of Attorney: Petitioners Power of Attorney

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1 Power of Attorney - Petitioners Power of Attorney (P.T.A.B. Dec. 23, 2019)
Attorney Docket No.: 39521-00851P1 In re Patent of: Michael Luna et al.
Patent No.: 9,369,539 Issue Date: Appl.
Serial No.: Filing Date: Title: June 14, 2016 14/467,881 August 25, 2014
Petitioner, Apple Inc., hereby appoints the following practitioners as its attorneys to transact all business in the United States Patent & Trademark Office associated with any inter partes review, covered business method review, post grant review, or other review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the above-captioned patent: W. Karl Renner, Reg. No. 41, 265 Roberto J. Devoto, Reg. No. 55,108 David L. Holt, Reg. No. 65,161 Stuart A. Nelson, Reg. No. 63,947 Jeremy Monaldo, Reg. No. 58,680 and all practitioners associated with PTO Customer Number 26171.
I have the authority to execute this document on behalf of Apple Inc. Apple Inc. By:M Name: Noreen Krall Title: Vice President, Chief litigation Counsel Date: .
cite Cite Document

1046 Exhibit: Declaration of Jonathan Bright

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1046-41 Exhibit - Declaration of Jonathan Bright (P.T.A.B. Sep. 15, 2020)
I am an experienced patent litigation attorney with more than six years of experience representing clients in cases involving, inter alia, graphical user interfaces, non-volatile memory, digital cameras, wireless communication
Bright has experience filing inter partes review petitions before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Mr. Bright’s cases span a broad range of technologies including CMOS image sensors, 4G LTE network equipment, graphical user interfaces for set-top boxes, front-end radio architecture, food packaging, flash memory, and deposition of thin carbon films.
Bright also interned at ATA Engineering, a consulting firm, where he conducted structural analysis studies using finite element software.
Jonathan Bright | Patent Attorney Atlanta | Fish Page 2 of 2 University of Georgia School of Law 2014
cite Cite Document

1046 Exhibit: Declaration of Jonathan Bright

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1046 Exhibit - Declaration of Jonathan Bright (P.T.A.B. Sep. 15, 2020)
I am an experienced patent litigation attorney with more than six years of experience representing clients in cases involving, inter alia, graphical user interfaces, non-volatile memory, digital cameras, wireless communication
Bright has experience filing inter partes review petitions before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Mr. Bright’s cases span a broad range of technologies including CMOS image sensors, 4G LTE network equipment, graphical user interfaces for set-top boxes, front-end radio architecture, food packaging, flash memory, and deposition of thin carbon films.
Bright also interned at ATA Engineering, a consulting firm, where he conducted structural analysis studies using finite element software.
Jonathan Bright | Patent Attorney Atlanta | Fish Page 2 of 2 University of Georgia School of Law 2014
cite Cite Document

2001 Exhibit: Ex 20012 Pro Hac Vice

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 2001-39 Exhibit - Ex 20012 Pro Hac Vice (P.T.A.B. Aug. 12, 2020)
Representative matters where I am or was actively involved include: • Intel Corp. v. VLSI Tech. LLC (IPR2020-00106, -00112, -00113, - 00114, -00141, -00142, -00158, -00498, -00526, -00527, -00582, - 00583).
I have previously been admitted to appear, pro hac vice, in the following matters before the U.S.P.T.O: • Intel Corp. v. VLSI Tech. LLC (IPR2020-00106, -00112, -00113, - 00114, -00141, -00142, -00158, -00498, -00526, -00527, -00582, - 00583).
In the following matters, institution was denied before my pro hac vice applications for admission were granted.
I am concurrently applying for pro hac vice admission in the following matters: • Apple Inc. v. SEVEN Networks, LLC (IPR2020-00236, -00255, - 00280, -00281, -00285, -00506, -00507, -00584).
Other than the matters identified in ¶¶ 11-14 supra, I have not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other proceedings before the U.S.P.T.O.
cite Cite Document

2006 Exhibit: Ex 2006 Pro Hac Vice Declaration

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 2006-40 Exhibit - Ex 2006 Pro Hac Vice Declaration (P.T.A.B. Aug. 12, 2020)
I have never had an application denied for admission to practice before any court or administrative body.
I have never had any sanctions or contempt citations imposed upon me by any court or administrative body.
I am concurrently applying for pro hac vice admission in the following matters: • Apple Inc. v. SEVEN Networks, LLC (IPR2020-00236, -00285).
Other than the matters identified in ¶11, supra, I have not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other proceedings before the U.S.P.T.O.
I have reviewed the Patent at issue as well as the Petition and the relevant art in this matter.
cite Cite Document

2006 Exhibit: Ex 2006 Pro Hac Vice Declaration

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 2006 Exhibit - Ex 2006 Pro Hac Vice Declaration (P.T.A.B. Aug. 12, 2020)
I have never had an application denied for admission to practice before any court or administrative body.
I have never had any sanctions or contempt citations imposed upon me by any court or administrative body.
I am concurrently applying for pro hac vice admission in the following matters: • Apple Inc. v. SEVEN Networks, LLC (IPR2020-00236, -00285).
Other than the matters identified in ¶11, supra, I have not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other proceedings before the U.S.P.T.O.
I have reviewed the Patent at issue as well as the Petition and the relevant art in this matter.
cite Cite Document

2001 Exhibit: Ex 20012 Pro Hac Vice

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 2001 Exhibit - Ex 20012 Pro Hac Vice (P.T.A.B. Aug. 12, 2020)
Representative matters where I am or was actively involved include: • Intel Corp. v. VLSI Tech. LLC (IPR2020-00106, -00112, -00113, - 00114, -00141, -00142, -00158, -00498, -00526, -00527, -00582, - 00583).
I have previously been admitted to appear, pro hac vice, in the following matters before the U.S.P.T.O: • Intel Corp. v. VLSI Tech. LLC (IPR2020-00106, -00112, -00113, - 00114, -00141, -00142, -00158, -00498, -00526, -00527, -00582, - 00583).
In the following matters, institution was denied before my pro hac vice applications for admission were granted.
I am concurrently applying for pro hac vice admission in the following matters: • Apple Inc. v. SEVEN Networks, LLC (IPR2020-00236, -00255, - 00280, -00281, -00285, -00506, -00507, -00584).
Other than the matters identified in ¶¶ 11-14 supra, I have not applied to appear pro hac vice in any other proceedings before the U.S.P.T.O.
cite Cite Document

1040 Exhibit: Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order re Schedule of Deadlines

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1040-35 Exhibit - Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order re Schedule of Deadlines (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
In the Motion, the parties request a 45 day extension in light of the global health crisis related to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic.
The parties shall advise the Court of any agreements reached no later than 1:00 p.m. three (3) business days before the pretrial conference.
*File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions, Joint Proposed Verdict Form, Responses to Motions in Limine, Updated Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and Updated Deposition Designations July 27, 2020 September 10, 2020 *File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time Reporting.
Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery Serve Disclosures Witnesses for Rebuttal Expert Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the Party with the Burden of Proof Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File Motions to Compel Discovery June 8, 2020 July 23, 2020 May 18, 2020 July 2, 2020 April 24, 2020 June 8, 2020 April 17, 2020 June 1, 2020 June 25, 2020 August 10, 2020 Deadline to Complete Mediation The parties are responsible for ensuring that a mediation report is filed no later than 5 days after the conclusion of mediation.
Final Election of Asserted Prior Art Deadline for Parties to file Stipulation as to Representative Products May 21, 2020 Comply with P.R.
cite Cite Document

1042 Exhibit: Sevens Notice Regarding Claim Reduction

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1042-37 Exhibit - Sevens Notice Regarding Claim Reduction (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
SEVEN hereby elects the following 36 claims pursuant to the Court’s Order (Dkt. 40), without prejudice as to non-elected claims and non-elected patents.
SEVEN reserves the right to seek leave of court to add, delete, substitute, or otherwise amend this list of asserted claims should further discovery or other circumstances so merit.
• • • • • • • • • ’550 patent: claims 1, 15, 18 ’127 patent: claims 24, 33, 42 ’968 patent: claims 1, 3, 5, 20 ’557 patent: claims 1, 14 ’476 patent: claims 1, 13, 23, 33, 43 ’176 patent: claims 1, 5, 8, 14 ’029 patent: claims 1, 7, 12 ’734 patent: claims 1, 6, 9 ’534 patent: claims 1, 7, 9, 11 Exhibit 1042 Apple v. Seven Networks
’771 patent: claims 1, 14, 26, 28, 30 • Dated: April 7, 2020
cite Cite Document

1041 Exhibit: Apple Incs Notice Regarding Prior Art Reduction

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1041-36 Exhibit - Apple Incs Notice Regarding Prior Art Reduction (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
Apple hereby elects the following no more than nine (9) prior art prior art references per patent from among the eighteen (18) prior art references previously identified per patent and no more than a total of forty-five (45) references, pursuant to the Court’s Order (Dkt. 40), without prejudice as to non-elected prior art references.
Apple reserves the right to seek leave of court to add, delete, substitute, or otherwise amend this list of prior art references should further discovery or other circumstances so merit.
Hasegawa1 Jornada and Hasegawa Jornada and Loughran Loughran and Loughran 2 Pocket PC and Collins 1 Apple refers herein to the prior art references by the abbreviated names defined in Apple’s November 25, 2019 First Supplemental Invalidity Contention.
E.g., “Hasegawa” refers to Japanese Patent Publication No. 2000/0000092204.
Backholm 236 and Aleksic Chueh and Android Chueh, Jiang and Kim 960 Giaretta 868 and Lee II Luna 176 and Kim 960
cite Cite Document

1043 Exhibit: Apples Initial Invalidity Contentions

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1043-38 Exhibit - Apples Initial Invalidity Contentions (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
Apple reserves the right to amend these invalidity contentions to assert these references depending on the claim construction and infringement positions SEVEN may take as the case proceeds.
Apple reserves the right to amend these invalidity contentions to assert these references depending on the claim construction and infringement positions SEVEN may take as the case proceeds.
The test for written description is “whether the disclosure of the application relied upon reasonably conveys to those skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date.” Ariad Pharms., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
Apple reserves the right to amend these invalidity contentions to assert these references depending on the claim construction and infringement positions SEVEN may take as the case proceeds.
Apple reserves the right to amend these invalidity contentions to assert these references depending on the claim construction and infringement positions SEVEN may take as the case proceeds.
cite Cite Document

1039 Exhibit: Claim Construction Memorandum and Order

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1039-34 Exhibit - Claim Construction Memorandum and Order (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
In addressing the role of the specification, the Phillips court quoted with approval its earlier observations from Renishaw PLC v. Marposs Societa’ per Azioni, 158 F.3d 1243, 1250 (Fed. Cir. 1998): Ultimately, the interpretation to be given a term can only be determined and confirmed with a full understanding of what the inventors actually invented and intended to envelop with the claim.
The Supreme Court of the United States has “read [35 U.S.C.] § 112, ¶ 2 to require that a patent’s claims, viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty.” Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 572 U.S. 898, 910, 134 S. Ct. 2120, 2129 (2014).
“A determination of claim indefiniteness is a legal conclusion that is drawn from the court’s performance of its duty as the construer of patent claims.” Datamize, LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted), abrogated on other grounds by Nautilus, 134 S. Ct. 2120.
The specification is consistent with this interpretation, disclosing an “authentication” step that is separate from entering a service activation code: FIG. 2 shows a secure e-mail provisioning technique in which the host system 100 authenticates the user of the mobile terminal 102.
Defendant cites prosecution history in which the patentee stated that “to register to a messaging account, the service activation code must relay information to the host system such as a user name and password combination.” (Dkt. No. 100, Ex. 14, Aug. 1, 2017 Response to Final Office Action, at 12 (emphasis omitted).)
cite Cite Document

1041 Exhibit: Apple Incs Notice Regarding Prior Art Reduction

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1041 Exhibit - Apple Incs Notice Regarding Prior Art Reduction (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
Apple hereby elects the following no more than nine (9) prior art prior art references per patent from among the eighteen (18) prior art references previously identified per patent and no more than a total of forty-five (45) references, pursuant to the Court’s Order (Dkt. 40), without prejudice as to non-elected prior art references.
Apple reserves the right to seek leave of court to add, delete, substitute, or otherwise amend this list of prior art references should further discovery or other circumstances so merit.
Hasegawa1 Jornada and Hasegawa Jornada and Loughran Loughran and Loughran 2 Pocket PC and Collins 1 Apple refers herein to the prior art references by the abbreviated names defined in Apple’s November 25, 2019 First Supplemental Invalidity Contention.
E.g., “Hasegawa” refers to Japanese Patent Publication No. 2000/0000092204.
Backholm 236 and Aleksic Chueh and Android Chueh, Jiang and Kim 960 Giaretta 868 and Lee II Luna 176 and Kim 960
cite Cite Document

1040 Exhibit: Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order re Schedule of Deadlines

Document IPR2020-00236, No. 1040 Exhibit - Order Granting Joint Motion to Amend the Docket Control Order re Schedule of Deadlines (P.T.A.B. May. 29, 2020)
In the Motion, the parties request a 45 day extension in light of the global health crisis related to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic.
The parties shall advise the Court of any agreements reached no later than 1:00 p.m. three (3) business days before the pretrial conference.
*File Joint Pretrial Order, Joint Proposed Jury Instructions, Joint Proposed Verdict Form, Responses to Motions in Limine, Updated Exhibit Lists, Updated Witness Lists, and Updated Deposition Designations July 27, 2020 September 10, 2020 *File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time Reporting.
Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery Serve Disclosures Witnesses for Rebuttal Expert Serve Disclosures for Expert Witnesses by the Party with the Burden of Proof Deadline to Complete Fact Discovery and File Motions to Compel Discovery June 8, 2020 July 23, 2020 May 18, 2020 July 2, 2020 April 24, 2020 June 8, 2020 April 17, 2020 June 1, 2020 June 25, 2020 August 10, 2020 Deadline to Complete Mediation The parties are responsible for ensuring that a mediation report is filed no later than 5 days after the conclusion of mediation.
Final Election of Asserted Prior Art Deadline for Parties to file Stipulation as to Representative Products May 21, 2020 Comply with P.R.
cite Cite Document
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>