`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 11
`Entered: August 2, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SONY CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FUJIFILM CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00876
`Patent 6,462,905 B1
`____________
`
`Before GREGG I. ANDERSON and SHEILA F. McSHANE, Administrative
`Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00876
`Patent 6,462,905
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`On August 2, 2018, a telephone conference was held between Sony
`Corporation (“Petitioner”), FUJIFILM Corporation, Inc. (“Patent Owner”),
`and Judges Anderson and McShane. The conference was requested by
`Petitioner in an email dated July 30, 2018. Petitioner requests authorization
`to file a two-page Reply to address an argument regarding the broadest
`reasonable interpretation of the claim term “gear tooth” that Patent Owner
`raises in its Preliminary Response (Paper 8). The Petition (Paper 2) does not
`construe “gear tooth.”
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`Petitioner argues good cause exists for leave to file a Reply because
`Petitioner could not have reasonably anticipated that Patent Owner would
`propose a construction for “gear tooth” that was inconsistent with references
`cited during prosecution of the challenged patents, including references that
`the named inventors authored. In addition, Petitioner asserts the proposed
`construction is unreasonably narrow. Petitioner also argues a Reply would
`fully inform us of the reasons Petitioner believed Patent Owner’s position
`was inconsistent.
`The Preliminary Response does not assert that the Petition is defective
`for failing to construe “gear tooth.” Patent Owner confirmed that position
`during the conference call.
`We are not persuaded that these circumstances warrant additional
`briefing. Should we institute trial, Petitioner’s position can be further
`briefed during the normal course of trial.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00876
`Patent 6,462,905
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`It is accordingly,
`ORDERED, Petitioner’s request to file a Reply to Patent Owner’s
`proposed construction of “gear tooth” in the Preliminary Response is denied.
`
`PETITIONER:
`Richard F. Giunta
`Michael N. Rader
`Randy J. Pritzker
`WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`rgiunta-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`mrader-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`rpritzker-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Eliot D. Williams
`Robert C. Scheinfeld
`Robert L. Maier
`Jennifer Tempesta
`Margaret M. Welsh
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`eliot.williams@bakerbotts.com
`robert.scheinfeld@bakerbotts.com
`robert.maier@bakerbotts.com
`jennifer.tempesta@bakerbotts.com
`margaret.welsh@bakerbotts.com
`
`3
`
`
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
