Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 43
`
`
`
` Entered: July 21, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMERICAN MEGATRENDS, INC., MICRO-
`STAR INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD, MSI COMPUTER CORP.,
`GIGA-BYTE TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and G.B.T., INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`KINGLITE HOLDINGS INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON and BRIAN J. McNAMARA,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JEFFERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings – Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 43
`
`
`
` Entered: July 21, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMERICAN MEGATRENDS, INC., MICRO-
`STAR INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD, MSI COMPUTER CORP.,
`GIGA-BYTE TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and G.B.T., INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`KINGLITE HOLDINGS INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before TREVOR M. JEFFERSON and BRIAN J. McNAMARA,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JEFFERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings – Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`
`
`A trial in this proceeding was instituted on November 6, 2015. Paper
`16 (“Decision to Institute”). A Scheduling Order entered set the oral hearing
`for August 1, 2016, if hearing is requested by the parties and granted by the
`Board. Paper 17 (“Scheduling Order”). American Megatrends, Inc., Micro-
`Star International Co., Ltd., MSI Computer Corp., Giga-Byte Technology,
`Co., Ltd., and G.B.T., Inc. (collectively, “Petitioner”) has requested oral
`hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70. Paper 40. The request is
`GRANTED.
`Each party will have 45 minutes of total argument time. Petitioner
`bears the ultimate burden of proof that the claims at issue in this review are
`unpatentable. Therefore, at oral hearing Petitioner will proceed first to
`present its case with regard to the challenged claims on which basis we
`instituted trial. Petitioner may also present argument in support of its
`Motion to Exclude. Thereafter, Kinglite Holdings LLC (“Patent Owner”)
`will argue its opposition to Petitioner’s case and Petitioner’s Motion to
`Exclude. Patent Owner will also present its own case with regard to its
`Motion to Amend and Motion to Exclude, as Patent Owner bears the burden
`of proof on these motions. Petitioner may use any time Petitioner reserved
`to oppose Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend and Motion to Exclude and to
`rebut Patent Owner’s opposition to both Petitioner’s challenges to the claims
`and Patent Owner’s opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Exclude. Finally,
`Patent Owner may use any time it reserved solely to rebut Petitioner’s
`opposition to Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend and Petitioner’s opposition
`to Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude.
`There is a strong public policy interest in making all information
`presented in these proceedings public, as the review determines the
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`
`patentability of claims in an issued patent and thus affects the rights of the
`public. This policy is reflected in part, for example, in 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1)
`and 35 U.S. C. § 326(a)(1) which provide that the file of any inter partes
`review or post grant review 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. There are no motions to seal in the present
`proceeding. Accordingly, the Board exercises its discretion to make the oral
`hearing publically available via in-person attendance.
`Specifically, the hearing will commence at 10:00 AM on August 1,
`2016 on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany 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. Any
`demonstrative exhibits must be served five business days before the hearing.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b). Demonstrative exhibits are not evidence and may not
`introduce new evidence or arguments. Instead, demonstrative exhibits
`should cite to evidence in the record. The parties are directed to St. Jude
`Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the University
`of Michigan, Case No. IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65),
`and CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, Case No.
`IPR2013-00033 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013) (Paper 118), regarding the
`appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits. Any issue regarding
`demonstrative exhibits should be resolved at least three days prior to the
`hearing by way of a joint telephone conference call to the Board. The
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`
`parties are responsible for requesting such a conference sufficiently in
`advance of the hearing to accommodate this requirement. Any objection to
`demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered
`waived.
`If demonstratives are to be used during oral argument, they must be
`served before the hearing in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b). Copies
`of the demonstratives should also be sent by email (not filed via PRPSPTAB
`E2E) to the Board no later than three days before the hearing. A hard copy
`of the demonstratives should be provided to the court reporter at the hearing.
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be
`directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual
`equipment are to be made 5 days in advance of the hearing date. The
`request is to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received
`timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing.
`The parties are reminded that the presenter must identify clearly and
`specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number)
`referenced during the hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the
`reporter’s transcript.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. However, lead or backup counsel may present the
`party’s argument. If either party anticipates 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01094
`Patent 6,401,202 B1
`
`PETITIONER:
`Vivek Ganti
`vg@hkw-law.com
`
`
`Gregory Ourada
`go@hkw-law.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Christopher Frerking
`chris@ntknet.com
`
`
`
`
`5
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
