`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: August 9, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MINIATURE PRECISION COMPONENTS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`EAGLE INDUSTRIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01403
`Patent 8,205,592 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM, JAMES A. WORTH, and
`RICHARD H. MARSCHALL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MARSCHALL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01403
`Patent 8,205,592 B2
`
`
`As set forth in the Scheduling Order (Paper 9), as modified by the
`May 16, 2018 Order (Paper 16), oral argument, if requested, is scheduled for
`September 7, 2018. Patent Owner requested oral argument in connection
`with this proceeding. Paper 23. Patent Owner requested “1 hour of total
`argument time, with 30 minutes allocated to the Petitioenr and 30 minutes
`allocated to the Patent Owner.” Id. at 1. Petitioner did not oppose Patent
`Owner’s request, or file its own request for oral argument, which was due on
`July 30, 2018. See Papers 9, 16. Patent Owner’s request is granted.
`Oral argument will commence at 10:00 AM ET on September 7,
`2018. The hearing will be conducted on the ninth floor of Madison Building
`East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. The hearing will be
`open to the public for in-person attendance, which will be accommodated on
`a first-come, first-served basis. The Board will provide a court reporter for
`the hearing, and the reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of
`the hearing.
`Each party will have thirty (30) minutes of total argument time, for a
`total of 60 minutes of argument. Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of
`proof that the claims at issue in these reviews are unpatentable. Therefore,
`at oral hearing Petitioner will proceed first to present its case with regard to
`the challenged claims on which basis we instituted trial in each proceeding.
`Petitioner may reserve rebuttal time. Thereafter, Patent Owner will argue its
`opposition to Petitioner’s case. Lastly, Petitioner may use any reserved time
`for rebuttal.
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be
`directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual
`equipment are to be made 5 days in advance of the hearing date. The
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01403
`Patent 8,205,592 B2
`
`request is to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received
`timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing. The
`parties are reminded that the presenter must identify clearly and specifically
`each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced
`during the hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s
`transcript.
`At least one member of the panel may be attending the hearing
`electronically from a remote location and will not be able to view the
`projection screen in the hearing room. Thus, if a demonstrative exhibit is
`not made available in advance or visible to the judge(s) presiding over the
`hearing remotely, that demonstrative exhibit will not be helpful. Each
`presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit
`(e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to ensure the
`clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript and for the benefit of any
`judge(s) presiding over the hearing remotely. A hard copy of the
`demonstratives, if filed, should be provided to the court reporter at the
`hearing. In addition, the parties are reminded that, at the oral argument, they
`“may rely upon evidence that has been previously submitted in the
`proceeding and may only present arguments relied upon in the papers
`previously submitted.” Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). “No new evidence or arguments may be
`presented at the oral argument.” Id.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`least seven business days prior to the hearing. The parties are further
`directed to file demonstrative exhibits three business days prior to the
`hearing, and request a conference call with the Board prior to the hearing to
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01403
`Patent 8,205,592 B2
`
`resolve any dispute over the propriety of each party’s demonstrative
`exhibits. The parties are responsible for requesting such a conference
`sufficiently in advance of the hearing to accommodate this requirement.
`Any objection to demonstrative exhibits that is not presented timely will be
`considered waived. The parties may refer to CBS Interactive Inc. v.
`Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC, IPR2013-00033 (PTAB October 23, 2013)
`(Paper 118), and St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Div., Inc. v. The Board of
`Regents of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27,
`2014) (Paper 65) regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. Lead or backup counsel, however, may present the
`party’s argument. If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`attending the oral argument, the parties should request a joint telephone
`conference with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral
`hearing to discuss the matter.
`It is
`ORDERED that oral argument will commence at 10:00 A.M. ET on
`September 7, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01403
`Patent 8,205,592 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`John S. Artz
`Bryan J. Schomer
`DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
`jsartz@dickinsonwright.com
`bschomer@dickinsonwright.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jacob D. Koering
`CANFIELD, PADDOCK & STONE
`koering@millercanfield.com
`
`
`5
`
`