`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`Paper 41
`Entered: April 7, 2014
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`VEEAM SOFTWARE CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`SYMANTEC CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00141 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00142 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00143 (Patent 7,191,299)
` Case IPR2013-00150 (Patent 7,093,086)1
`____________
`
`Before FRANCISCO C. PRATS, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK,
`THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, and TRENTON A. WARD,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Request for Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`1 This paper addresses issues that are identical in the listed cases. The parties are
`not authorized to use this heading style for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00141 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00142 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00143 (Patent 7,191,299)
`Case IPR2013-00150 (Patent 7,093,086)
`
`
`
`The Scheduling Orders for these cases set the date for oral hearing to
`May 5, 2014, if hearing is requested by the parties and granted by the Board. Both
`parties have requested oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70. Petitioner’s and
`Patent Owner’s request for oral hearing in each of the cases is granted. The four
`cases will be heard together. Each side will have 90 minutes to present arguments
`and can determine for itself how to divide time among the three patents involved.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s claims at
`issue in this review are unpatentable. Therefore, Petitioner will open the hearing
`by presenting its case regarding the challenged claims for which the Board
`instituted trial. Patent Owner has filed a motion to amend the claims and bears the
`burden of proof with respect to that motion. After Petitioner’s presentation,
`therefore, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s argument and also argue in
`support of its motion to amend. Each side may reserve time to respond to
`arguments presented by the other side with some limitations. More specifically, to
`the extent that Petitioner reserves rebuttal time, it may respond to Patent Owner’s
`presentation on all matters. To the extent that Patent Owner reserves rebuttal time,
`however, it may respond only to Petitioner’s arguments opposing the motion to
`amend.
`The hearing will commence at 1:00 PM on May 5, 2014, on the ninth floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. The Board
`will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the reporter’s transcript will
`constitute the official record of the hearing. The hearing will be open to the public
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00141 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00142 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00143 (Patent 7,191,299)
`Case IPR2013-00150 (Patent 7,093,086)
`
`
`
`for in-person attendance that will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served
`basis.
`
`The parties are reminded that under 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(7), a proponent of
`deposition testimony must file such testimony as an exhibit. The Board will not
`consider any deposition testimony that has not been so filed.
`Furthermore, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be
`served at least five business days before the hearing date. The Board requests also
`that such exhibits be filed at the Board at least five business days before the
`hearing. The parties must file any objections to the demonstratives with the Board
`at least two business days before the hearing. Any objection to demonstrative
`exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered waived. The objections
`should identify with particularity which demonstratives are subject to objection,
`and include a short (one sentence or less) statement of the reason for each
`objection. No argument or further explanation is permitted. The Board will
`consider the objections and schedule a conference if deemed necessary.
`Otherwise, the Board will reserve ruling on the objections until after the oral
`argument. The parties are directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc.
`v. The Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB
`January 27, 2014) (Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of
`demonstrative exhibits.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person at the
`oral hearing. However, any counsel of record may present the party’s argument. If
`either party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending the oral argument,
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00141 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00142 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00143 (Patent 7,191,299)
`Case IPR2013-00150 (Patent 7,093,086)
`
`
`
`the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference with the Board no later than
`two business days prior to the oral hearing to discuss the matter.
`Any special requests for audio visual equipment should be directed to
`Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be honored unless
`presented in a separate communication not less than five days before the hearing
`directed to the above email address.
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00141 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00142 (Patent 6,931,558)
`Case IPR2013-00143 (Patent 7,191,299)
`Case IPR2013-00150 (Patent 7,093,086)
`
`
`Lori A. Gordon
`Michael Q. Lee
`Byron L. Pickard
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN
`& FOX PLLC
`lgordon-PTAB@skgf.com
`mlee-PTAB@skgf.com
`bpickard-ptab@skgf.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joseph J. Richetti
`Lawrence G. Kurland
`BRYAN CAVE LLP
`joe.richetti@bryancave.com
`lgkurland@bryancave.com
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`