`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 24
`Entered: March 22, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`DEXCOM, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`WAVEFORM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01051
`Patent 7,529,574 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before BART A. GERSTENBLITH, JON B. TORNQUIST, and
`ELIZABETH M. ROESEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ROESEL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED SCHEDULING AND BRIEFING ORDER
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01051
`Patent 7,529,574 B2
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`On December 5, 2017, Patent Owner filed a contingent motion to
`amend, and on February 27, 2018, Petitioner filed a response to the motion.
`On March 12, 2018, the parties contacted the Board seeking an extension of
`the page limit for Patent Owner’s reply concerning its motion to amend and
`seeking a sur-reply by Petitioner regarding the motion to amend. The parties
`asserted that the requested procedural modifications are justified by the
`change in the allocation of burdens on motions to amend following Aqua
`Products, Inc. v. Matal, 872 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2017). On March 20,
`2018, the parties proposed agreed-upon page limits for the reply and sur-
`reply and a revised briefing schedule.
`The parties’ joint request for procedural modifications is reasonable in
`light of Aqua Products and does not result in a change of the oral argument
`date. See Paper 20 (previously changing the oral argument date from
`May 22, 2018 to June 5, 2018).
`
`ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that, the page limit for Patent Owner’s reply regarding its
`motion to amend shall be eighteen (18) pages;
`FURTHER ORDERED that, on or before by April 18, 2018,
`Petitioner may file a sur-reply of no more than six (6) pages responding to
`Patent Owner’s reply regarding its motion to amend; provided that,
`Petitioner’s sur-reply may not include new testimonial evidence and may not
`include new prior art grounds of unpatentability;
`FURTHER ORDERED that, the Due Date Appendix of our
`Scheduling Order (Paper 8) is amended as follows:
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01051
`Patent 7,529,574 B2
`
`DUE DATE 4 ............................................................................... May 3, 2018
`Motion for observation regarding cross-examination of reply witness
`Motion to exclude evidence
`Request for oral argument
`
`DUE DATE 5 ............................................................................. May 17, 2018
`Response to observation
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6 ............................................................................. May 24, 2018
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 7 .............................................................................. June 5, 2018
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01051
`Patent 7,529,574 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`Matthew Johnson
`David Cochran
`Calvin P. Griffith
`JONES DAY
`mwjohnson@jonesday.com
`dcochran@jonesday.com
`cpgriffith@jonesday.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Scott Eads
`Karri Bradley
`Nicholas Aldrich
`Jason Wrubleski
`SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT, P.C.
`seads@schwabe.com
`kbradley@schwabe.com
`NAldrich@schwabe.com
`JWrubleski@schwabe.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
