`571.272.7822
`
`
`Paper No. 74
`
` Entered: April 17, 2018
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SKECHERS U.S.A., INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NIKE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00620 (Patent D723,783 S)
`Case IPR2017-00621 (Patent D723,781 S)1
`____________
`
`Before KEN B. BARRETT, GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, and
`SCOTT A. DANIELS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Re-designating Paper 51 for Public Availability without Redaction
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5(a)
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues common to both cases, therefore, we issue a
`single order to be entered in each case. The parties are authorized to use this
`style heading when filing an identical paper in both proceedings, provided
`that such heading includes a footnote attesting that “the word-for-word
`identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the heading.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00620 (Patent D723,783 S)
`IPR2017-00621 (Patent D723,781 S)
`
`
`
`
`On February 1, 2018, in each proceeding, Petitioner filed a Reply.
`Paper 512. Petitioner filed the Reply publicly without any confidential
`designation. About two months later, on March 29, 2018, by email to the
`Board, Petitioner requested re-designation of the Reply as “Board and
`Parties Only” but did not file a redacted, public version of the document.
`See Ex. 3002 (email communication). The Board complied with Petitioner’s
`request and re-designated Paper 51 that same day.
`On April 6, 2018, we issued an Order instructing Petitioner to file a
`motion to seal Paper 51 as well as a redacted, public version in each
`proceeding. Paper 71, 4; Paper 70, 4.3 On April 10, 2018, in both
`proceedings, Petitioner filed a paper styled as a Response to the Board’s
`Order. Paper 73, Paper 72 (“Response”). The Response pertains to our
`instructions for filing a motion to seal Paper 51. See generally Response.
`This Order addresses that Response. Petitioner indicates that, in view
`of certain circumstances set forth in the Response, “it is no longer necessary
`for Petitioner to file a motion to seal or to file a redacted version of
`Paper 51.” Response, 1. Specifically, Petitioner avers that the parties
`“reached a compromise on March 30, 2018,” which included “restoring
`Paper 51 to ‘public’ status.” Id.
`On April 12, 2018, a combined final hearing was conducted in these
`proceedings. A transcript of that hearing shall be entered in due course.
`During the final hearing, as a preliminary matter, we asked counsel for each
`party whether Paper 51 should be re-designated in the Board’s filing system
`
`2 Petitioner’s Reply is designated as Paper 51 in both proceedings.
`3 Unless otherwise indicated, we refer sequentially to paper numbers
`corresponding to documents filed in IPR2017-00620 and IPR2017-00621.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00620 (Patent D723,783 S)
`IPR2017-00621 (Patent D723,781 S)
`
`
`
`to permit public access. Counsel for both parties confirmed that Paper 51
`should be made publicly available, without redaction, in the record of each
`proceeding.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Paper 51 is re-designated and made available for
`public access, without redaction, in the record of each proceeding.
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Samuel K. Lu
`Michael R. Fleming
`Talin Gordnia
`Morgan Chu
`IRELL & MANELLA LLP
`slu@irell.com
`mfleming@irell.com
`tgordnia@irell.com
`mchu@irell.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Christopher J. Renk
`Erik S. Maurer
`Audra Eidem Heinze
`Kurt Reister
`Michael J. Harris
`BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD
`crenk@bannerwitcoff.com
`emaurer@bannerwitcoff.com
`aheinze@bannerwitcoff.com
`kriester@bannerwitcoff.com
`mharris@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`3
`
`
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
