`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 28
`Entered: June 6, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`FANDUEL, INC.
`DRAKINGS, INC.
`BWIN.PARTY DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PLC,
`Petitioners,
`v.
`CG TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2017-00902
`Patent RE39,818
`
`
`
`
`
` WEATHERLY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Authorizing Patent Owner to File a List of Reply Arguments
`It Considers Improper
`Authorizing Petitioner to File a Response
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00902
`Patent RE39,818
`
`
`On June 5, 2018, the parties contacted the Board in a series of three e-
`mails in which they seek authorization to file papers relating to the issue of
`whether Petitioner raised new arguments for the first time in its Reply
`(Paper 25). After conferring, the parties jointly proposed that they follow a
`process similar to that used by the Board in CBM2016-00009 and IPR2017-
`00114. More specifically, the parties propose that:
`(1) Patent Owner will file a listing identifying the portions of
`the Petitioner’s Reply that it believes raise arguments for the first
`time. The listing would only identify those portions by page and line
`number of the Petitioner’s Reply. No other arguments or other
`substantive comments would be included. The listing would be filed
`by June 11.
`(2) In response to Patent Owner’s listing, Petitioner will file a
`response explaining briefly how the argument responds to arguments
`raised by the Patent Owner in the Patent Owner’s Response. The
`response would be filed by June 25.
`Patent Owner may file a numbered list of citations to pages and line
`numbers in Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 25) that Patent Owner contends exceed
`the proper scope of a reply under 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner shall
`file its list as a paper entitled “Patent Owner’s List of Improper Reply
`Arguments.”
`Petitioner may file a response citing the location in the Patent Owner
`Response to which each identified portion of the Reply responds along with
`a brief, non-argumentative explanation of how the Reply material responds
`to Patent Owner’s argument and/or where the argument in the Reply was
`raised in the Petition (Paper 1).
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00902
`Patent RE39,818
`
`
`ORDER
`In view of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner is authorized to file a List of Improper
`Reply Arguments as described above by no later than June 11, 2018;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is authorized to file a
`Response, as described above by no later than June 25, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00902
`Patent RE39,818
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Eric Buresh
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`Eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`
`Jonathan Berschadsky
`FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER
`& SCINTO
`jberschadsky@merchantgould.com
`
`Adam Yowell
`BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER
`SCHRECK, LLP
`ayowell@bhfs.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joshua Goldberg
`James Barney
`Scott Allen
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`Joshua.goldberg@finnegan.com
`James.barney@finnegan.com
`Scott.allen@finnegan.com
`
`
`4
`
`
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
