`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`WI-FI ONE, LLC,
`Appellant
`
`v.
`
`BROADCOM CORPORATION,
`Appellee
`______________________
`
`2015-1944, -1945, -1946
`______________________
`
`Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2013-
`00601, IPR2013-602, IPR2013-00636.
`______________________
`
`ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
`______________________
`
`Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, DYK,
`MOORE, O’MALLEY, REYNA, WALLACH, TARANTO, CHEN,
`HUGHES, and STOLL, Circuit Judges
`PER CURIAM.
`
`O R D E R
` Appellant Wi-Fi One, LLC filed a petition for rehear-
`ing and rehearing en banc in all three appeals. A response
`was invited from the Appellee, Broadcom Corporation, to
`the three petitions. The petitions and responses were
`considered by the panel that heard the appeal, see Fed.
`
`
`
`Case: 15-1944 Document: 67 Page: 2 Filed: 01/04/2017
`
`
`
` 2
`
` WI-FI ONE, LLC v. BROADCOM CORPORATION
`
`Cir. R. 35 Practice Notes, and thereafter referred to the
`circuit judges in regular active service. A poll was re-
`quested and taken, and the court decided that the appeal
`warrants en banc consideration.
` Upon consideration thereof,
`
`IT IS ORDERED THAT:
`(1) The petitions for rehearing en banc filed by
`Appellant Wi-Fi One, LLC are granted.
`(2) The court’s opinions in Wi-Fi One, LLC v.
`Broadcom Corp., 837 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2016),
`Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., 2016 WL
`4933344 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2016), and Wi-Fi One,
`LLC v. Broadcom Corp., 2016 WL 4933418 (Fed.
`Cir. Sept. 16, 2016) are vacated, and the appeals
`are reinstated.
`(3) The Appellant and Appellee are requested to
`file supplemental briefs. The briefs should address
`the following question:
`Should this court overrule Achates Refer-
`ence Publishing, Inc. v. Apple Inc., 803
`F.3d 652 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and hold that
`judicial review is available for a patent
`owner to challenge the PTO’s determina-
`tion that the petitioner satisfied the time-
`liness requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)
`governing the filing of petitions for inter
`partes review?
`Briefing should be limited to this question.
`(4) The supplemental en banc briefs and briefs of
`any amici curiae shall be electronically filed in the
`ECF system, and thirty paper copies of each brief
`shall be filed with the court. Two paper copies of
`all filings shall be served on opposing counsel.
`Briefs shall adhere to the type-volume limitations
`
`
`
`Case: 15-1944 Document: 67 Page: 3 Filed: 01/04/2017
`
`WI-FI ONE, LLC v. BROADCOM CORPORATION
`
` 3
`
`set forth in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
`32 and Federal Circuit Rule 32.
`(5) The supplemental brief of Appellant must be
`filed by Monday, February 13, 2017. Any amicus
`brief supporting Appellant’s position or support-
`ing neither position must be filed by Thursday,
`February 23, 2017. Appellee’s supplemental brief
`must be filed by Wednesday, March 15, 2017. Any
`amicus brief supporting Appellee’s position must
`be filed by Monday, March 27, 2017. Appellant’s
`reply brief must be filed by Wednesday, March 29,
`2017.
`(6) The court invites the views of the United
`States Patent and Trademark Office as amicus
`curiae. Any other briefs of amicus curiae may be
`filed without consent and leave of court. All ami-
`cus briefs must comply with Federal Rule of Ap-
`pellate Procedure 29 and Federal Circuit Rule 29.
`All amicus briefs shall be filed as stated above.
`(7) The appeal will be heard en banc on the basis
`of the supplemental briefs ordered herein and oral
`argument.
`(8) Oral argument will be scheduled at a later
`date.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` January 4, 2017
`
` Date
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` FOR THE COURT
`
` /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
` Peter R. Marksteiner
` Clerk of Court
`
`
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
