`Trials@uspto.gov
`Entered: April 27, 2018
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`NAUTILUS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`ICON HEALTH & FITNESS INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2017-01363 (Patent 9,403,047 B2);
`Case IPR2017-01407 (Patent 9,616,276 B2);
`Case IPR2017-01408 (Patent 9,616,276 B2)1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before GEORGE R. HOSKINS, TIMOTHY J. GOODSON, and
`JAMES A. WORTH, Administrative Patent Judges.
`GOODSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order applies to all three proceedings. These proceedings have not
`been consolidated. The parties may use a consolidated caption only if a
`paper contains a footnote indicating that the identical paper has been filed in
`each proceeding.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01363 (Patent 9,403,047 B2)
`IPR2017-01407 (Patent 9,616,276 B2)
`IPR2017-01408 (Patent 9,616,276 B2)
`
`On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court held that a final written
`
`decision under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) must decide the patentability of all claims
`challenged in the petition. SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu, 2018 WL 1914661, at
`*10 (U.S. Apr. 24, 2018). In our Decisions on Institution in these
`proceedings, we determined that Petitioner demonstrated a reasonable
`likelihood that it would establish that at least one of the challenged claims of
`the challenged patent is unpatentable. Case IPR2017-01363, Paper 7, 18;
`Case IPR2017-01407, Paper 6, 16; Case IPR2017-01408, Paper 7, 16.
`Pursuant to the holding in SAS, we modify our institution decisions to
`institute on all of the challenged claims and all of the grounds presented in
`the Petitions.
`The parties remain free to stipulate to changes in the schedule under
`the terms of the Scheduling Order. If, after conferring, the parties wish to
`otherwise change the schedule or submit briefing not set forth in the
`Scheduling Order, the parties must, within one week of the date of this
`Order, request a conference call with the panel to seek authorization for such
`changes or briefing.
`
`ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that we modify our institution decisions in these
`proceedings, which were issued pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), to include
`review of all challenged claims and all grounds presented in the Petition for
`that proceeding; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner and Patent Owner shall confer
`to determine whether they desire any changes to the schedule or briefing not
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01363 (Patent 9,403,047 B2)
`IPR2017-01407 (Patent 9,616,276 B2)
`IPR2017-01408 (Patent 9,616,276 B2)
`
`already permitted under the Scheduling Order, and, if so, request a
`conference call with the panel to seek authorization for such changes or
`briefing within one week of the date of this Order.
`
`PETITIONER:
`Ryan McBrayer
`Amy E. Simpson
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`rmcbrayer@perkinscoie.com
`asimpson@perkinscoie.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`John Gadd
`Mark Ford
`Adam Smoot
`MASCHOFF BRENNAN
`jgadd@mabr.com
`mford@mabr.com
`asmoot@mabr.com
`
`
`3
`
`