Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 32
`
` Entered: March 2, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO, L.P.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TECHNICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`Case IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`Before BRYAN F. MOORE, MINN CHUNG, and
`JACQUELINE T. HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER1
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues common to each of the captioned cases. Thus,
`we exercise our discretion to issue a single order, to be entered in each case.
`The parties are not authorized to use this case caption, or to file consolidated
`papers, without prior authorization.
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 32
`
` Entered: March 2, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO, L.P.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TECHNICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`Case IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`Before BRYAN F. MOORE, MINN CHUNG, and
`JACQUELINE T. HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER1
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues common to each of the captioned cases. Thus,
`we exercise our discretion to issue a single order, to be entered in each case.
`The parties are not authorized to use this case caption, or to file consolidated
`papers, without prior authorization.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`
`
`On March 1, 2018, a conference call was conducted among counsel
`
`for Petitioner, National Oilwell Varco, L.P., counsel for Patent Owner,
`
`Technical Industries, Inc., and Judges Harlow and Chung. The purpose of
`
`the call was to address the parties’ request for additional briefing and
`
`modifications to the Scheduling Order. Petitioner’s Motion to Strike the
`
`Proposed Expert Opinions of Patent Owner Technical’s William Emblom
`
`(“Motion to Strike,” Paper 272) was also discussed.
`
`In consideration of Petitioner’s reliance, in its Reply (Paper 26), on
`
`the Supplemental Declaration of Dr. John P. Rodgers (“Supplemental
`
`Declaration,” Ex. 1027), as well as complexities that have arisen with regard
`
`to scheduling Dr. Rodgers’ deposition concerning that declaration, the
`
`parties jointly request limited additional briefing to address Dr. Rodgers’
`
`Supplemental Declaration and forthcoming deposition testimony. In view of
`
`the parties’ agreement and the particular facts and circumstances of this
`
`case, including the circumscribed nature of the additional briefing sought,
`
`we grant the parties’ request. Accordingly, Patent Owner may file, no later
`
`than March 13, 2018, a five-page Sur-Reply to Petitioner’s Reply, addressed
`
`exclusively to the subject matter of the Supplemental Declaration and
`
`Dr. Rodgers’ deposition testimony regarding the same. Petitioner is likewise
`
`authorized to file, by March 20, 2018, a five-page Sur-Sur-Reply, also
`
`confined to the subject of the Supplemental Declaration and Dr. Rodgers’
`
`testimony regarding same.
`
`
`
`2 For the sake of brevity citations will be provided to IPR2017-00648 only.
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`
`
`The parties’ additionally request that we reschedule Due Date 7, the
`
`date for Oral Hearing in the above captioned matters, such that it coincides
`
`with Due Date 7 in two other proceedings, IPR2017-00860 and IPR2017-
`
`00910, which concern related patents. Alternatively, the parties’ request that
`
`we consolidate the above captioned proceedings with IPR2017-00860 and
`
`IPR2017-00910. In view of resource constraints at the Board, the late
`
`timing of this request (less than one-month prior to Due Date 7 in IPR2017-
`
`00648 and IPR2017-00699), and the fact each of the four aforementioned
`
`cases concerns a different patent, we deny these requests.
`
`Lastly, we address Petitioner’s Motion to Strike the testimony of
`
`Patent Owner’s declarant, Dr. Emblom (Paper 27). As we explained during
`
`the conference call, to the extent Petitioner intended to move to strike
`
`Dr. Emblom’s declaration, it was required to seek authorization from the
`
`Board before so doing. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(b) (“A motion will not be
`
`entered without Board authorization.”). As we further explained, to the
`
`extent Petitioner intended to move to exclude Dr. Emblom’s declaration, an
`
`action that would not have required authorization from the Board, a motion
`
`to exclude evidence “must identify objections in the record in order and
`
`must explain the objections.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(c). Because Petitioner
`
`neither requested authorization prior to filing its Motion to Strike, filed
`
`timely objections to Dr. Emblom’s declaration, nor identified any such
`
`objections in the record in its motion, we expunge Petitioner’s Motion to
`
`Strike from the record.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that on or before March 13, 2018, Patent Owner may file
`
`a five-page Sur-Reply to Petitioner’s Reply, addressed exclusively to the
`
`subject of the Supplemental Declaration and Dr. Rodgers’ deposition
`
`testimony regarding same;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that on or before March 20, 2018, Petitioner
`
`may file a five-page Sur-Sur-Reply, addressed exclusively to the subject of
`
`the Supplemental Declaration and Dr. Rodgers’ testimony regarding same;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ request to change Due Date 7
`
`is denied;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ request to consolidate
`
`IPR2017-00648, IPR2017-00699, IPR2017-00860, and IPR2017-00910 is
`
`denied; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Strike the
`
`Proposed Expert Opinions of Patent Owner Technical’s William Emblom
`
`(IPR2017-00648, Paper 27; IPR2017-00699, Paper 30) is to be expunged
`
`from the record in each of IPR2017-00648 and IPR2017-00699.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00648 (Patent 7,263,887 B2)
`IPR2017-00699 (Patent 7,401,518 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Robert M. Bowick, Jr.
`Bradford T. Laney
`RALEY & BOWICK, L.L.P.
`rbowick@raleybowick.com
`blaney@raleybowick.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Ted M. Anthony
`BABINEAUX, POCHÉ, ANTHONY & SLAVICH, L.L.C.
`tanthony@bpasfirm.com
`
`Joseph L. Lemoine, Jr.
`LEMOINE & ASSOCIATES, LLC
`joe@lemoine.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
