`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 41
`
`Entered: May 4, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`NADER ASGHARI-KAMRANI and KAMRAN ASGHARI-KAMRANI,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-000641
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before JONI Y. CHANG, JUSTIN T. ARBES, and
`FRANCES L. IPPOLITO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`On April 26, 2017, a conference call was held between counsel for
`both parties, and Judges Chang, Arbes, and Ippolito. Patent Owner
`requested that the oral hearing, scheduled for May 15, 2017, be delayed for
`three weeks, in view of a medical emergency of its back-up counsel.
`
`
`1 We exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be entered in both cases.
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`Petitioner opposed, arguing that Patent Owner’s request is not supported by
`a good cause showing because Patent Owner has other counsel who can
`present at the oral hearing.
`During the conference call, we notified the parties that Patent Owner’s
`request is granted. As discussed, the one-year statutory deadline for entering
`the final written decisions for the instant proceedings expires on September
`21, 2017. Paper 15.2 We observed that a short delay for the oral hearing
`would not impact the parties’ ability to file their substantive briefs.3 Nor
`would such a delay impact our ability to timely render the final written
`decisions. Further, although we were cognizant that Patent Owner has other
`counsel of record, we nevertheless were mindful of back-up counsel’s
`unexpected medical emergency. After considering the totality of the
`circumstances and weighing Patent Owner’s needs for having its desired
`counsel appear at the oral hearing and the inconvenience of rescheduling the
`oral hearing, on balance, we determined that a short delay for the oral
`hearing was reasonable, and instructed the parties to provide proposed
`alternative dates for the hearing. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c).
`Subsequently, however, Petitioner reconsidered and withdrew its
`request for an oral hearing. Patent Owner did not request an oral hearing in
`the instant proceedings.
`
`
`2 All citations are to CBM2016-00063, unless otherwise noted.
`3 Petitioner’s reply to Patent Owner’s opposition to its motion to exclude
`evidence was timely filed on May 1, 2017. Paper 39.
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`
`In view of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the oral hearing scheduled for May 15, 2017, is
`canceled.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Thomas Rozylowicz
`Timothy Riffe
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`CBM36137-0007CP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jae Youn Kim
`Harold L. Novick
`Sang Ho Lee
`NOVICK, KIM & LEE, PLLC
`skim@nkllaw.com
`hnovick@nkllaw.com
`slee@nkllaw.com
`
`Steven L. Ashburn
`Timothy M. Hsieh
`MH2 TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP, LLP
`sashburn@mh2law.com
`tim@mh2law.com
`
`
`
`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
