`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 42
`Entered: February 9, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GOOGLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`PATRICK ZUILI,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case CBM2016-00022
`Patent 8,326,763 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, GLENN J. PERRY, and MIRIAM L. QUINN,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`Order
`Conduct of Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00022
`Patent 8,326,763 B2
`
`
`On February 8, 2017, Patent Owner sent an email to the Board stating:
`“In the interest of justice and for the record, Patent Owner Patrick Zuili is
`respectfully soliciting both Boards covering the 3 [CBMs] to authorize the
`filing as Exhibits of all email communications dated 1/26/2017, 1/28/2017[,]
`between Patent owner and Petitioner with the PTAB.” Ex. 3007. We
`understand the reference to “both Boards” as referring to the Board panel in
`CBM2016-00008, and the Board panel in CBM2016-00021 and CBM2016-
`00022.
`The request provides no basis for determining that the email
`communications referenced by Patent Owner are of significance to any
`matter before the Board or that it would be in the interest of justice to file
`them as exhibits in this proceeding.1
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request is denied.
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This is not an indication that any party should be submitting substantive
`arguments in an email communication. To the contrary, substantive
`arguments should not be made in any email communication to the Board.
`The parties are on notice that substantive arguments in any further email
`communications to the Board may be denied consideration.
`
`2
`
`
`
`3
`
`CBM2016-00022
`Patent 8,326,763 B2
`
`Counsel for Petitioner:
`
`Robert g. Pluta
`rpluta@mayerbrown.com
`
`Saqib Siddiqui
`ssiddiqui@mayerbrown.com
`
`
`
`Patent Owner (pro se):
`
`Patrick Zuili
`patrick@tenderbox.tv
`
`
`
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
