`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper 22
`Entered: February 6, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC., ZIMMER INC.,
`and BIOMET INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ADVANCED ORTHOPAEDIC SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00236
`Patent 8,702,707 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`Before LORA M. GREEN, SCOTT A. DANIELS, and
`ROBERT A. POLLOCK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GREEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Oral Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00236
`Patent 8,702,707 B2
`
`
`We instituted the above-identified inter partes review on May 31,
`2016. Paper 6. The Scheduling Order set February 21, 2017, as the date for
`oral argument, if requested by either party. Paper 7. Both parties requested
`an oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a). Papers 20, 21. The
`parties’ request is granted.
`The hearing will commence at 9:00 AM Eastern Time, on February
`21, 2017, and will be conducted at the USPTO Central Headquarters
`located in Alexandria, Virginia (the ninth floor of Madison Building East,
`600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314). The hearing will be open
`to the public for in-person attendance that will be accommodated on a first-
`come first-serve basis.
`Each party will have 45 minutes of total time to present its arguments.
`Because Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the challenged
`claims are unpatentable, Petitioner will proceed first to present its case
`regarding the challenged claims and ground for which the Board instituted
`trial. Patent Owner will then respond to Petitioner’s arguments. Petitioner
`may reserve time to respond to arguments presented by Patent Owner.
`Patent Owner may not reserve time. No live testimony from any witness
`will be taken at the oral argument. There are no motions to amend or other
`motions to be addressed at the hearing.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. Lead or backup counsel, however, may present the
`party’s argument. If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`attending the oral argument, the parties should request a joint telephone
`conference with the Board no later than (2) two business days prior to the
`oral hearing to discuss the matter.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00236
`Patent 8,702,707 B2
`
`
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the oral argument and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the oral argument.
`The hearing transcript will be entered in the record of this proceeding.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`least (7) seven business days before the hearing date and filed no later than
`the time of the oral argument. The parties also shall provide a courtesy copy
`of any demonstrative exhibits to the Board at least (3) three business days
`prior to the hearing by emailing them to Trials@uspto.gov.
`Demonstrative exhibits are not evidence, but merely a visual aid at the
`oral arguments. Demonstrative exhibits may not introduce new evidence or
`raise new arguments, but instead, 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 IPR2013-00041
`(PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65) and CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich
`Patent Licensing, LLC, Case IPR2013-00033 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013) (Paper
`118) for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits.
`The Board requests that the parties attempt to resolve any objections
`to the demonstratives, and if any objections cannot be resolved, the parties
`must file any such objections with the Board at least (2) 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
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00236
`Patent 8,702,707 B2
`
`objections and schedule a conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the
`Board will rule on the objections at the hearing.
`To aid in the preparation of an accurate transcript, each party shall
`provide a paper copy of any demonstratives to the court reporter on the day
`of the oral arguments. Such paper copies shall not become part of the record
`of this proceeding. 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.
`At least one judge will be participating remotely via a
`videoconferencing device and will not be able to view the projection screen
`in the hearing room. 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 avoid confusion, and to
`ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`Requests for audio-visual equipment are to be made (5) five 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.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`5
`
`IPR2016-00236
`Patent 8,702,707 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Eric Hayes
`Xun (Michael) Liu
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS, LLP
`eric.hayes@kirkland.com
`michael.liu@kirkland.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joseph Burgess
`BURGESS LAW OFFICE, PLLC
`jburgess@burgessiplaw.com
`
`
`
`