throbber
IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`
`
`DOCKET NO.: 2211726-00143
`Filed on behalf of Unified Patents Inc.
`By: David L. Cavanaugh, Reg. No. 36,476
`Daniel V. Williams 45,221
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: (202) 663-6000
`Email: David.Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Ashraf Fawzy, Reg. No. 67,914
`Jonathan Stroud, Reg. No. 72,518
`Unified Patents Inc.
`1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 10
`Washington, DC, 20009
`Tel: (202) 805-8931
`Email: jonathan@unifiedpatents.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________________________________
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`Petitioner
`v.
`BLACKBIRD TECH LLC d/b/a BLACKBIRD TECHNOLOGIES
`Patent Owner
`IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`REPLY TO PATENT OWNER’S PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`AS AUTHORIZED ON OCTOBER 11, 2017
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`Petitioner files this Reply to address Patent Owner’s statements in the Patent
`
`Owner Preliminary Response (“POPR”) regarding Petitioner’s withdrawal of
`
`Exhibit 1011 (“voluntary responses”).
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`Petitioner submitted voluntary responses akin to those submitted in numerous
`
`prior proceedings. They addressed, especially early in the implementation of the IPR
`
`proceedings, Petitioner’s relationship with its members. Petitioner began providing
`
`such voluntary responses in the spirit of transparency and after it was raised with the
`
`Board in Clouding IP and Dragon IP. (IPR2013-00586, Paper 15; IPR2014-01252,
`
`Paper 23). Here, Patent Owner sought a deposition of Mr. Jakel, Petitioner’s CEO,
`
`prior to the POPR, based on his signature on the voluntary responses.
`
`Patent Owner offered no other reason for the deposition and did not raise any
`
`evidence or information challenging the relationship between Petitioner and its
`
`members. Petitioner sought to avoid an expensive, burdensome, premature
`
`deposition of Mr. Jakel; instead, Petitioner offered other reasonable forms of
`
`discovery, such as responding to RFPs, additional interrogatories, and/or providing
`
`a deposition transcript of Mr. Jakel on the same issue from IPR2014-01252, and
`
`asked Petitioner to suggest alternative, narrowly tailored, less burdensome
`
`discovery. Patent Owner refused.
`
`1
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`Because Patent Owner would not accept any other discovery short of a
`
`deposition on short notice, as the Board permitted in Digital Stream (IPR2016-
`
`01749, Paper 16), Petitioner requested that the voluntary responses be withdrawn.
`
`(Paper 7). On September 7, 2017, the Board granted Petitioner’s request. (Paper 8).
`
`Notwithstanding the withdrawal, all facts in Petitioner’s voluntary responses remain
`
`true. Expunging the voluntary responses leaves Patent Owner with the proper burden
`
`and the Parties in the position to negotiate appropriate discovery, if necessary.
`
`II.
`
`PETITIONER'S RESPONSE TO PATENT OWNER'S STATEMENTS
`Patent Owner’s argument that a negative inference should be drawn by
`
`Petitioner’s withdrawal of its voluntary responses is unwarranted and misleading.
`
`See, e.g., POPR at p. 55, l. 8-10; p. 56, l. 5-7, 11-15; p. 58, l. 3-6. First, as Petitioner
`
`expressed numerous times during meet and confers, the request to expunge the
`
`voluntary responses was a result of Patent Owner choosing not to pursue other less
`
`burdensome discovery. Petitioner also noted that the burden (regarding discovery
`
`and real-party-in-interest (“RPI”)) was on Patent Owner, that a certification and not
`
`the voluntary responses was all that was required under the rules, and that Patent
`
`Owner had provided nothing to contradict Petitioner’s RPI certification. Third, there
`
`is no reason to question the veracity of the voluntary responses, as Petitioner
`
`maintains that all facts therein are true and remains willing to consider narrowly
`
`tailored requests concerning them.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`Patent Owner further states that “[a]ny presumption afforded to Petitioner
`
`Patents on its real party-in-interest certification is now lost” due to the withdrawal
`
`of the voluntary responses. Id. at p. 58, l. 3-6. It is far from clear how Patent Owner
`
`can assert that anything “is now lost” by the withdrawal of a voluntary paper not
`
`required by the rules.
`
`Patent Owner’s statements that Petitioner was not willing to provide
`
`meaningful discovery regarding RPI are incorrect. Id., at p. 51, l. 11-17; p. 55, l. 8-
`
`10; p. 56, l. 5-7, 11-15; and p. 58, l. 3-6. To the contrary, Petitioner offered
`
`discovery that they chose not to pursue. For example, Blackbird bases its RPI
`
`arguments in part on a letter it received from defendants to a district court litigation.
`
`But Blackbird failed to mention this letter in any meet and confer and never
`
`requested discovery on the issue. Indeed, the POPR was the first time Petitioner
`
`learned of the letter.
`
`Patent Owner insinuates that Petitioner only offered self-serving discovery.
`
`Id. at p. 56, n. 8. Again, this misrepresentation ignores Petitioner’s offer for Patent
`
`Owner to suggest reasonable discovery tailored to a relevant issue. The reality is
`
`that Patent Owner chose not to pursue discovery and now, despite the lack of
`
`evidence, suggests a negative inference on Petitioner. Petitioner remains open to
`
`providing discovery on RPI consistent with the Rules.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`/David L. Cavanaugh/
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01525
`Patent 7,174,362
`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Registration No. 36,476
`
`Jonathan Stroud
`Registration No. 72,518
`
`Ashraf Fawzy
`Registration No. 67,914
`
`Daniel V. Williams
`Registration No. 45,221
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that on October 18, 2017 I caused a true and correct copy of
`
`the foregoing materials:
`
` Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`
`to be served via email as previously agreed by the parties
`
`Walter D. Davis, Jr.: wdavis@dbjg.com
`Wayne M. Helge: whelge@dbjg.com
`Aldo Noto: anoto@dbjg.com
`
`
`
`
`/Daniel V. Williams/
`Daniel V. Williams
`
`1
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket