`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEXCOM, INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`WAVEFORM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01679
`Patent 7,146,202
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before BRIAN P. MURPHY, JON B. TORNQUIST, and
`ELIZABETH M. ROESEL, Administrative Patent Judges
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01679
`Patent 7,146,202
`Pursuant to the Board’s Scheduling Order dated March 6, 2017 (Paper 11)
`
`and the Board’s Amended Scheduling Order dated April 7, 2017 (Paper 15), Patent
`
`Owner WaveForm Technologies, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) respectfully requests oral
`
`argument, currently scheduled for December 7, 2017. As the Board has also
`
`scheduled oral argument for December 7, 2017 in the co-pending proceeding
`
`IPR2016-01680, Patent Owner requests that each party be given a total of one (1)
`
`hour of oral argument time to present its arguments on both matters.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a), and without intending to waive any issue
`
`not specifically identified, Patent Owner specifies the following issues to be argued
`
`with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7,146,202:
`
`1.
`
`The correct constructions of the claim terms “a structurally flexible
`
`core” and “surrounding, covering, and in contact with,” “outer surface of the core,”
`
`and “first end of the core.”
`
`2. Whether challenged claims 1-3, 6, 8, 10, and 11 are anticipated under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b) by Hagiwara;
`
`3. Whether challenged claim 5 is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
`
`Hagiwara and Rosenblatt;
`
`4. Whether challenged claims 1-3, 5, 6, and 9-11 are obvious under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Wilson and Rosenblatt;
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01679
`Patent 7,146,202
`Exclusion or non-consideration of certain evidence submitted by
`
`5.
`
`Petitioner in its Reply, as set forth in Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude Evidence;
`
`6.
`
`Response to arguments raised in any Motion to Exclude by Petitioner,
`
`or its Reply in support thereof;
`
`Response to arguments raised in Petitioner’s Reply;
`
`Response to issues specified by Petitioner in its request for oral
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`argument;
`
`9.
`
`Response to Petitioner’s presentation on all matters; and
`
`10. Any additional issues on which the Board seeks clarification, or which
`
`the Board deems necessary for issuing a final written decision.
`
`Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board provide audio-visual
`
`equipment to display demonstrative exhibits and evidence of record, including a
`
`projector and screen for a PowerPoint presentation or other visual display from a
`
`computer, as well as an ELMO projector.
`
`Date: October 10, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT, P.C.
`
`By:
`
`
`
`/Scott D. Eads/
`Scott D. Eads
`Reg. No.: 41,726
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that on the 10th day
`
`of October, 2017, a complete and entire copy of these PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT was provided via electronic mail to the
`
`Petitioner’s known representatives at the e-mail addresses noted below:
`
`Matthew W. Johnson
`JONES DAY
`One Mellon Center
`500 Grant Street
`Pittsburgh, PA 15219
`mwjohnson@jonesday.com
`
`David B. Cochran
`JONES DAY
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114
`dcochran@jonesday.com
`
`Vishal V. Khatri
`JONES DAY
`51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20001
`vkhatri@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /Scott D. Eads/
`Scott D. Eads, Reg. No.: 41,726
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
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
