`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 17
`Date: June 24, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al.
`Petitioners,
`v.
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I & II LLC
`Patent Owner1
`
`Case CBM2014-00028
` Case CBM2014-00029
`Case CBM2014-00030
`Case CBM2014-00031
`Case CBM2014-00033
`
`
`
`
`
`Before THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, HYUN J. JUNG, and GREGG I.
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This caption is not authorized for use by the parties.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2014-00028
`Case CBM2014-00029
`Case CBM2014-00030
`Case CBM2014-00031
`Case CBM2014-00033
`
`
`On June 23, 2014, an initial conference call was held in these cases. Present
`
`on the call were respective counsel for the parties and Administrative Patent
`
`Judges Thomas Giannetti, Hyun Jung, and Gregg Anderson. The following
`
`matters were discussed:
`
`1. Schedule
`
`No proposed changes were requested.
`
`2. Protective Order
`
`No protective order was entered. The parties will contact the Board to
`
`request entry of the default protective order if necessary.
`
`3. Additional Discovery
`
`No requests for additional discovery are expected.
`
`4. Motions to Amend
`
`Patent Owner requested authorization to file a motion cancelling the claims
`
`on which a covered business method patent review was instituted in proceeding
`
`CBM2014-00031. Petitioners do not oppose. The request was granted. Patent
`
`Owner will file its motion promptly.
`
`
`
`Patent Owner plans to file a contingent motion to amend in CBM2014-
`
`00033 (and possibly other proceedings) and will request a conference with the
`
`Board before filing such motions.
`
`6. Motions to Exclude
`
`The parties are referred to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64 regarding procedures for
`
`objecting to evidence and motions to exclude. The Board will require the moving
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2014-00028
`Case CBM2014-00029
`Case CBM2014-00030
`Case CBM2014-00031
`Case CBM2014-00033
`
`party to show that the procedures have been followed in considering any motion to
`
`exclude evidence.
`
`7. Settlement
`
`The parties had nothing to report.
`
`8. Other Matters
`
`Petitioners request that depositions of experts be limited to a half day per
`
`expert per patent. According to Petitioners, the issues do not warrant the full seven
`
`hours provided by our rules for expert depositions. Patent Owner opposes.
`
`After due consideration by the panel, Petitioners’ request is denied. While
`
`the issues are limited, the expert declarations are quite detailed. Nevertheless, the
`
`parties are expected to cooperate in conducting expert depositions in an efficient
`
`manner. Seven hours for expert depositions should be regarded as a time limit and
`
`not a requirement. Any perceived deposition abuses should be brought to the
`
`immediate attention of the panel.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2014-00028
`Case CBM2014-00029
`Case CBM2014-00030
`Case CBM2014-00031
`Case CBM2014-00033
`
`PETITONERS:
`
`Donald R. Steinberg
`Monica Grewal
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`don.steinberg@wilmerhale.com
`monica.grewal@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`Herbert D. Hart III
`Jonathan R. Sick
`Eligio C. Pimentel
`MCANDREWS, HELD & MALLOY, LTD.
`hhart@mcandrews-ip.com
`jsick@mcandrews-ip.com
`epimentel@mcandrews-ip.com
`
`
`Henry A. Petri, Jr.
`James P. Murphy
`NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP
`henry.petri@novakdruce.com
`james.murphy@novakdruce.co
`
`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
