Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 25
`Date: July 14, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LTD.
`(TSMC) and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DSS TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-010301
`Patent 5,652,084
`_____________
`
`
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, and
`KRISTINA M. KALAN Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KALAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Request for Oral Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`The Scheduling Order for this case sets the date for oral hearing as
`August 12, 2015, if a hearing is requested by the parties and granted by the
`
`
`1 Case IPR2014-01493 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 25
`Date: July 14, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LTD.
`(TSMC) and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DSS TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-010301
`Patent 5,652,084
`_____________
`
`
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, and
`KRISTINA M. KALAN Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KALAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Request for Oral Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`The Scheduling Order for this case sets the date for oral hearing as
`August 12, 2015, if a hearing is requested by the parties and granted by the
`
`
`1 Case IPR2014-01493 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01030
`Patent 5,652,084
`
`Board. Both parties have requested oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.70. The parties’ request for oral hearing is granted.
`
`Petitioner will have 45 minutes to present arguments. Patent Owner
`will have 45 minutes to respond. 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. After Petitioner’s
`presentation, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s argument. Petitioner
`may reserve rebuttal time to respond to arguments presented by Patent
`Owner.
`The hearing will commence at 2:00 PM on August 12, 2015, 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 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 parties
`also shall provide a courtesy copy of any demonstrative exhibits to the
`Board at least five business days prior to the hearing by emailing them to
`Trials@uspto.gov. The parties shall not file any demonstrative exhibits in
`this proceeding without prior authorization from the Board.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01030
`Patent 5,652,084
`
`
`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 parties should note that one member of the panel is expected to
`attend the oral hearing electronically from a remote location.
`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. The parties may divide argument among counsel as they wish.
`Should there be any disagreement among the parties on the division of
`argument, the parties shall meet and confer in advance of the hearing to try
`to resolve the dispute and, if necessary, contact the Board for assistance.
`If any party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending the oral
`argument, 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.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01030
`Patent 5,652,084
`
`
`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.
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that oral arguments in this proceeding shall take place
`beginning at 2:00 PM Eastern Time on August 12, 2015, on the ninth floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`For Petitioner:
`
`David Odell
`David L. McCombs
`Scott Cunning
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`scott.cunning@haynesboone.com
`
`
`
`For Patent Owner:
`
`Andriy Lytvyn
`Anton J. Hopen
`SMITH & HOPEN, P.A.
`andriy.lytvyn@smithhopen.com
`anton.hopen@smithhopen.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
