`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 53
`Entered: July 25, 2013
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC. ET AL.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CUOZZO SPEED TECHNOLOGIES LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2012-00001 (JL)
`Patent 6,778,074
`____________
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, and JOSIAH C. COCKS,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 316(a)(10)
`
`This inter parte review was instituted on January 9, 2013. (Paper 15.) A
`
`Scheduling Order was issued on January 9, 2013, which set the date for oral
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2012-00001
`Patent 6,778,074
`
`hearing to August 16, 2013, if hearing is requested by the parties and granted by
`the Board. (Paper 16.) On July 12, 2013, both parties requested oral hearing
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70. (Papers 46 and 47.) The requests are granted.
`
`Each party will have sixty (60) minutes of total oral argument time. Garmin,
`as petitioner, bears the ultimate burden of proof that Cuozzo’s claims at issue in
`this review are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral hearing Garmin will proceed first
`to present its case with regard to the challenged claims on which basis the Board
`instituted trial. Thereafter, Cuozzo will respond to Garmin’s case and also present
`its own case with regard to Cuozzo’s motion to amend claims, as Cuozzo bears the
`burden of proof on its motion to amend claims. After that, Garmin will make use
`of the rest of its time responding to Cuozzo’s presentation on all matters. Finally,
`Cuozzo will take its turn but addressing only issues in its motion to amend claims.
`
`There is a strong public policy interest in making all information presented
`in an inter partes review public, as the review determines the patentability of
`claims in an issued patent and thus affects the rights of the public. This policy is
`reflected in part in 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1) which provides that the file of any inter
`partes review shall be made available to the public, except that any petition or
`document filed with the intent that it be sealed shall, if accompanied by a motion to
`seal, be treated as sealed pending the outcome of the ruling on the motion.
`
`Some information in the record of this case has been sealed pursuant to
`Cuozzo’s motion to seal. In a telephone conference call held on July 16, 2013, the
`Board instructed counsel for Cuozzo to respond within one week on whether
`Cuozzo opposes making the hearing public. Cuozzo has filed no such objection.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2012-00001
`Patent 6,778,074
`
`Accordingly, the Board exercises its discretion to make the oral hearing publically
`available via in-person attendance.
`
`Specifically, the hearing will commence at 1:00 PM, on August 16, 2013,
`and it will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the ninth floor of
`Madison Building East, 600 Dulaney Street, Alexandria, Virginia. In-person
`attendance will be accommodated on a first come first serve basis.
`
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the reporter’s
`transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served five
`business days before the hearing and filed at the Board no later than at the time of
`the hearing. Any issue regarding demonstrative exhibits should be resolved prior
`to the hearing by way of a joint telephone conference call to the Board.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR 2012-00001
`Patent 6,778,074
`
`For PETITIONER
`
`Jennifer C. Bailey
`HOVEY WILLIAMS LLP
`jcb@hoveywilliams.com
`
`Jason R. Mudd
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`6201 College Blvd., Suite 300
`Overland Park, Kansas 66211
`Jason.Mudd@EriseIP.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER
`
`John R. Kasha
`Kasha Law LLC
`john.kasha@kashalaw.com
`
`Cabrach J. Connor
`Taylor Dunham, LLP
`301 Congress Ave. Ste. 1050
`Austin, TX 78701
`cconnor@taylordunham.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
