`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper: 26___
`Entered: March 2, 2018
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MLB ADVANCED MEDIA, L.P.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FRONT ROW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01127
`Patent 8,583,027 B2
`____________
`
`Before JUSTIN T. ARBES, KERRY BEGLEY, and
`TERRENCE W. McMILLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARBES, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01127
`Patent 8,583,027 B2
`
`
`A conference call in the above proceeding was held on February 28,
`2018, among respective counsel for Petitioner and Patent Owner, and Judges
`Arbes, Begley, and McMillin. The call was held to discuss Petitioner’s
`request for a four-week extension of DUE DATE 2 in the Scheduling Order
`(Paper 10) from March 2, 2018, to March 30, 2018.
`Petitioner argued during the call that an extension is appropriate due
`to the allegedly large number of issues raised by Patent Owner’s Motion to
`Amend (Paper 25) and due to the previous briefing on Petitioner’s Motions
`to Strike, which occurred between DUE DATES 1 and 2. Specifically, after
`Patent Owner filed its original Motion to Amend on December 15, 2017,
`we authorized and subsequently granted Petitioner’s Motions to Strike
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend and Exhibits 2001–2036, but permitted
`Patent Owner to re-file its Motion to Amend with certain changes. Paper 24.
`Patent Owner opposed Petitioner’s request for an extension, arguing that the
`request is untimely and the revised Motion to Amend did not add any
`material, but if an extension is granted, the remaining dates, including DUE
`DATE 7, also should be changed.
`As explained during the call, we are persuaded that good cause exists
`for only a limited extension of the trial schedule, due to the briefing that the
`parties engaged in regarding Petitioner’s Motions to Strike. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.5(c)(2). The time period for Petitioner to file its reply and opposition to
`the Motion to Amend will be extended by two weeks, with a corresponding
`increase of two weeks in the time period for Patent Owner to file its reply to
`the opposition. The parties shall confer with each other to reach an
`agreement as to modified deadlines for DUE DATES 4–6, and shall file a
`notice accordingly. DUE DATE 6 may be set no later than May 16, 2018.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01127
`Patent 8,583,027 B2
`
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that DUE DATE 2 in the Scheduling Order (Paper 10) is
`changed to March 16, 2018, and DUE DATE 3 is changed to April 30, 2018;
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall confer with each other to
`reach an agreement on modified deadlines for DUE DATES 4–6, and shall
`file promptly a notice of any stipulation.
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`George C. Beck
`Chase J. Brill
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`gbeck@foley.com
`cbrill@foley.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Richard T. Black
`FOSTER PEPPER PLLC
`rich.black@foster.com
`
`Richard Krukar
`ORTIZ & LOPEZ, PLLC
`krukar@olpatentlaw.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
