Page 1
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`5
`6
`
`7
`8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`-----------------------------X
`D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` vs. Case Nos.
` IPR2016-01425
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC., IPR2016-01426
` Patent Owner.
`-----------------------------X
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` Tuesday, November 1, 2016
` 4:00 p.m.
`B E F O R E:
` Panel:
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK
` JUDGE EASTHOM
` JUDGE WARD
` JUDGE ANDERSON
`
`Reported by:
`Jennifer Ocampo-Guzman, CRR, CLR
`JOB NO. 115115
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-1
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`5
`6
`
`7
`8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`-----------------------------X
`D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` vs. Case Nos.
` IPR2016-01425
`CHRIMAR SYSTEMS, INC., IPR2016-01426
` Patent Owner.
`-----------------------------X
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` Tuesday, November 1, 2016
` 4:00 p.m.
`B E F O R E:
` Panel:
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK
` JUDGE EASTHOM
` JUDGE WARD
` JUDGE ANDERSON
`
`Reported by:
`Jennifer Ocampo-Guzman, CRR, CLR
`JOB NO. 115115
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-1
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`Page 2
`
` Attorneys for Petitioner:
` LAW OFFICES OF S. J. CHRISTINE YANG
` 17220 Newhope Street
` Fountain Valley, California 92708
` BY: VICTORIA HAO, ESQ.
` MARTHA HOPKINS, ESQ.
` DAVID HOFFMAN, ESQ.
`
` Attorneys for Patent Owner:
` THOMPSON & KNIGHT
` 1722 Routh Street
` Dallas, Texas 75201
` BY: JUSTIN COHEN, ESQ.
`
` REISING ETHINGTON
` 755 West Big Beaver Road
` Troy Michigan 48084
` BY: RICHARD HOFFMANN, ESQ.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-2
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Good afternoon,
`this is Judge Weinschenk. With me on
`the line is Judge Easthom, Judge Ward,
`and Judge Anderson. This is a
`conference call for IPR2016-01425 and
`01426.
` Who do we have on the line for the
`petitioner D-Link Systems.
` MS. HAO: Good afternoon, Your
`Honor, and member of the board. I'm
`Victoria Hao, along with me is my
`colleagues Martha Hopkins, David
`Hoffman, and Christine Yang on behalf of
`petitioner D-Link Systems Inc.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay. Ms. Hao,
`will you be doing the speaking for
`petitioner?
` MS. HAO: Yes.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: And do you have
`a court reporter on the line?
` MS. HAO: I believe so. I believe
`the patent owner has a court reporter on
`the line.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Oh, okay. And
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-3
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`who do we have on the line for patent
`owner?
` MR. COHEN: Good afternoon, Your
`Honor. Justin Cohen of Thompson &
`Knight for patent owner. Also on the
`line is Rick Hoffmann of Reising
`Ethington. And I'll be doing the
`speaking this afternoon.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: And it sounds
`like you retained a court reporter for
`this call?
` MR. COHEN: That's correct, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Since we have a
`court reporter on the line, I'll ask
`each of the counsel for the parties to
`introduce themselves again before we
`they start speaking so that the court
`reporter can keep that straight.
` Also, Mr. Cohen, I'll ask that you
`file a transcript of the call as an
`exhibit when it's ready.
` MR. COHEN: Yes, Your Honor.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-4
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
` Petitioner D-Link Systems requested
`this call because they are seeking
`authorization to file a reply to the
`patent owner preliminary response.
` So why don't we start with the
`petitioner and tell us why you need a
`reply.
` MS. HAO: Thank you, Your Honor.
`This is Victoria Hao again on behalf of
`petitioner D-Link Systems.
` Your Honor, without moving for
`additional discovery, the patent owner
`elected to file its preliminary
`responses, in part, alleging
`insufficient disclosure of the real
`party-in-interest. And this is a new
`issue, argument raised by the patent
`owner, although there is burden on the
`petitioner to prove a named third party
`or the real party-in-interest for the
`petition, we would like to have this
`opportunity to discuss it with the
`board, to see whether a short reply
`could be more completed, both on factual
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-5
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`and legal issues.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: What would you
`intend to do with your reply? Are you
`simply going to -- I think in your
`e-mail you indicated that there were
`factual and legal errors in patent
`owner's preliminary response. Are you
`simply going to identify and correct
`those errors or what are you planning to
`do with your reply?
` MS. HAO: That's right, Your Honor.
`We are planning to address the decision
`that the PTAB had issued regarding the
`real party-in-interest and how the
`circumstantial evidence that presented
`in the patent owner preliminary
`responses did not meet the burden.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: I guess I'm
`asking, are you just going to respond to
`the issues presented in the preliminary
`response?
` MS. HAO: Yes.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay. And I
`think you indicated that you don't plan
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-6
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`to file a declaration with the reply; is
`that correct?
` MS. HAO: Not by the petitioner
`D-Link Systems. We would use public
`document as the patent owner preliminary
`response method.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay. Are you
`planning to just reply on the evidence
`that is submitted with the preliminary
`response, or are you going to submit
`some additional evidence of your own?
` MS. HAO: We're currently planning,
`if we get the opportunity to present
`maybe why the Taiwan security law
`required the annual report proceeding,
`that is cited by the preliminary
`response, as well as a prior public
`declaration submitted by the alleged
`third party D-Link Corp., how they have
`no interest, no activities, nor assets
`since 2006.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: I'm sorry. What
`was the second piece of evidence you
`might submit, a declaration from another
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-7
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`proceeding?
` MS. HAO: Filed with US District
`court to remove from, lack due of
`jurisdiction, on a patent litigation.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: And is that a
`declaration that was submitted by --
` MS. HAO: D-Link Corporation, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay. So you
`plan to submit some declaration but it's
`not -- it's not prepared for this case.
` MS. HAO: That's correct.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: All right.
`Let's turn to the patent owner.
` I understand you oppose this
`request; is that correct?
` MR. COHEN: That's correct, Your
`Honor. It is, as Ms. Hao pointed out,
`D-Link's burden to identify all the real
`parties-in-interest under 42.108(c), our
`understanding is that the petitioner is
`required to show good cause why they can
`file a reply.
` In this instance, Chrimar did
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-8
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`nothing but point out public documents,
`annual reports, and docket sheets from
`D-Link's cases. So this was all
`information that D-Link had at its
`disposable -- at its disposal, when it
`filed its petition in the first place,
`D-Link chose to identify only the US
`company, without any additional
`evidence, explanation whatsoever about
`why D-Link Corp. was not named.
` So in our view, D-Link is simply
`seeking to remedy its error, and
`introduce new evidence, which is -- will
`not rise to good cause, and would be
`prejudicial to Chrimar.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: What would you
`say if they were limited to just
`identifying, for example, factual and
`legal errors that were in your response,
`or at least that they allege are factual
`and legal errors?
` MR. COHEN: Your Honor, we would
`remain opposed, but obviously that would
`lessen the amount of prejudice to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-9
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`Chrimar. Again, our position is that it
`is D-Link's burden to identify all real
`parties-in-interest or at least provide
`some explanation about why D-Link Corp.
`was not named as a real
`party-in-interest, and in this instance,
`they're trying to do that late.
` But as Your Honor noted, without
`introducing new evidence that would
`reduce the amount of prejudice to the
`patent owner.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay.
` Petitioner, Ms. Hao, is there
`anything you would like to say in
`response to patent owner?
` MS. HAO: Yes, if I have misspoke,
`I think earlier I was trying to say that
`there is no burden on petitioner to
`prove why a third party are not a real
`party-in-interest, and the petitioner,
`D-Link System's perspective, the
`argument is a new argument raised by the
`patent owner in its preliminary
`responses.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-10
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay. All
`right.
` Well, I am going to place you on a
`brief hold while I confer with the
`panel, and I will be back with you
`shortly.
` (Panel confers off the record. )
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: This is Judge
`Weinschenk again. I've conferred with
`the panel, and we have one additional
`question for the parties.
` Petitioner, with respect to this
`declaration that you might be submitting
`with a reply, is that a witness that
`would be made available at some point
`for a cross-examination by patent owner?
` MS. HAO: Your Honor, we have to
`look into that, because that was filed
`in District Court back in 2013. We have
`to check the status of the employee.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: So you're not
`sure if that person is still an employee
`of D-Link.
` MS. HAO: Yes, but it was a sworn
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-11
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
`declaration filed in an unrelated
`proceeding.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Okay.
`Understood. All right.
` Well, with that, the panel doesn't
`have any further questions.
` We're going to take this under
`advisement, and we will issue an order
`shortly, ruling on this issue.
` Are there any questions at this
`time from petitioner, Ms. Hao?
` MS. HAO: Not at this time, thank
`you, Your Honor.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Are think any
`questions from patent owner, Mr. Cohen?
` MR. COHEN: No questions, Your
`Honor. Thank you.
` JUDGE WEINSCHENK: Thank you all
`very much for your time. Have a great
`afternoon. This call is adjourned.
` MS. HAO: Thank you.
` MR. COHEN: Thank you, Your Honor.
` (Time noted: 4:15 p.m.)
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-12
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
` CONFERENCE CALL - 11/1/16
` C E R T I F I C A T E
`STATE OF NEW YORK )
` : ss.
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK )
`
` I, Jennifer Ocampo-Guzman, a
` Notary Public within and for the State
` of New York, do hereby certify that the
` within is a true and accurate
` transcript of the proceedings taken on
` November 1, 2016.
` I further certify that I am not
` related to any of the parties to this
` action by blood or marriage and that I
` am in no way interested in the outcome
` of this matter.
` IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have
` hereunto set my hand this 1st day of
` November 2016.
`
` ________________________________
` JENNIFER OCAMPO-GUZMAN, CRR, CLR
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Chrimar Systems, Inc.
`Exhibit 2088-13
`IPR2016-01426 USPN 9,019,838
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
