`Trials@uspto.gov
`571.272.7822 Filed: May 31, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GRACO CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00816 (Patent D604,970 S)
`Case IPR2016-00826 (Patent D616,231 S)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before KEN B. BARRETT, JOSIAH C. COCKS, and
`JENNIFER S. BISK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BARRETT, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`1 This Paper will be entered in each case. The parties are not authorized to
`use this caption style.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00816 (Patent D604,970 S)
`IPR2016-00826 (Patent D616,231 S)
`
`Petitioner Graco Children’s Products Inc. requested oral argument
`
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a). IPR2016-00816, Paper 23;
`IPR2016-00826, Paper 24. Patent Owner Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc. did not
`file a request for oral argument. Petitioner’s request is granted. Due to the
`related nature of the cases, we exercise our discretion to consolidate the
`hearings. Additionally, we also exercise our discretion and will allow Patent
`Owner to present argument notwithstanding the lack of a request from Patent
`Owner.
`The hearing will commence at 9:00 AM ET, on Thursday, July 6,
`
`2017, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street,
`Alexandria, Virginia. The hearing will be open to the public for in person
`attendance that will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis.
`The Board will provide a court reporter, and the reporter’s transcript will
`constitute the official record of the hearing.
`
`Each party will have a total of forty-five (45) minutes to present
`arguments for both cases. Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that
`Patent Owner’s patent claims at issue are unpatentable. Thus, Petitioner will
`proceed first to present its case with respect to the challenged patent claims
`and grounds with respect to which the Board instituted trial. Thereafter,
`Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s arguments. Petitioner may reserve
`some of its argument time to respond to Patent Owner’s presentation.
`
`The parties are reminded that the demonstrative exhibits must be
`served and filed in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b).
`
`The Board asks that the parties attempt to resolve objections to the
`demonstratives, and if any objections cannot be resolved, the parties must
`file those objections with the Board no later than June 30, 2017. Any
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00816 (Patent D604,970 S)
`IPR2016-00826 (Patent D616,231 S)
`
`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
`may refer to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Div., Inc. v. The Board of Regents
`of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014)
`(Paper 65) regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits.
`Requests for audio-visual equipment are to be made five (5)
`
`business 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.
`
`We expect lead counsel for each party to be present at the hearing,
`although lead or back-up counsel of record may make the presentation. If
`either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not attend 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.
`
`The parties are reminded that, at the oral argument, they “may rely
`upon evidence that has been previously submitted in the proceeding and may
`only present arguments relied upon in the papers previously submitted.”
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14,
`2012). “No new evidence or arguments may be presented at the oral
`argument.” Id.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00816 (Patent D604,970 S)
`IPR2016-00826 (Patent D616,231 S)
`
`In addition to issues directed to the patentability of the challenged
`
`claims, the parties shall be prepared to address at the hearing
`Petitioner’s Motion to Seal (IPR2016-00816, Paper 22; IPR2016-00826,
`Paper 23) and specifically, Patent Owner’s designation of certain
`exhibits, in their entirety, as confidential protective order material.
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that oral argument will commence at 9:00 AM ET, on
`Thursday, July 6, 2017, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600
`Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Gregory Carlin
`Walter Hill Levie, III
`John W. Harbin
`MEUNIER CARLIN & CURFMAN LLC
`litdocketing@mcciplaw.com
`tlevie@mcciplaw.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brian Lynch
`Raymond Niro
`NIRO MCANDREWS, LLC
`blynch@niro-mcandrews.com
`rnirojr@niro-mcandrews.com
`
`4
`
`