throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 16
`Entered: March 5, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`UNILOC 2017 LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2019-00251
`Patent 6,993,049 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, JEFFREY S. SMITH, and GARTH D. BAER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BAER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00251
`Patent 6,993,049 B2
`
`
`On March 3, 2020, Petitioner contacted the Board by e-mail requesting
`authorization to file a motion to strike portions of Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply in this
`proceeding, because, according to Petitioner, Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply reproduces
`content from and discusses new evidence that was not previously submitted as
`evidence in this proceeding.
`The panel does not authorize the requested Motion to Strike. As explained
`in the Board’s Trial Practice Guide, “[i]n most cases, the Board is capable of
`identifying new issues or belatedly presented evidence when weighing the
`evidence at the close of trial, and disregarding any new issues or belatedly
`presented evidence that exceeds the proper scope of reply or sur-reply.” See
`Consolidated Trial Practice Guide 80 (November 2019), available at
`https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated. The Trial Practice Guide
`instructs that “striking the entirety or a portion of a party’s brief is an exceptional
`remedy that the Board expects will be granted rarely.” Id. We decline at this time
`to exclude the sur-reply submissions.
`The propriety or impropriety of the identified portions of the reply will be
`addressed, if necessary, in our Final Written Decision. To the extent the panel
`determines that any item identified by Patent Owner warrants additional briefing,
`an Order will be issued, providing such instruction to the parties. Furthermore,
`although at this time we do not deem it necessary to resolve this issue prior to the
`Final Written Decision or via formal briefing, should either party request a hearing,
`the parties may address this issue during oral argument.
`In view of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Petitioner is not authorized to file a motion to strike.
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00251
`Patent 6,993,049 B2
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Roberto J. Devoto
`Jeremy J. Monaldo
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`devoto@fr.com
`monaldo@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Ryan Loveless
`Brett Mangrum
`James Etheridge
`Jeffrey Huang
`ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP
`ryan@etheridgelaw.com
`brett@etheridgelaw.com
`jim@etheridgelaw.com
`jeff@etheridgelaw.com
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket