throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 35
`Entered: October 18, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`DONGHEE AMERICA, INC. and DONGHEE ALABAMA, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PLASTIC OMNIUM ADVANCED INNOVATION AND RESEARCH,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER, and
`ROBERT L. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`KAISER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`Donghee America, Inc. and Donghee Alabama, LLC (“Petitioner”)
`and Plastic Omnium Advanced Innovation and Research (“Patent Owner”)
`each request oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 in each of these
`cases.1 Paper 29; Paper 30.2 Subject to the discussion in the present order,
`we grant the parties’ requests for oral hearing. Oral argument shall
`commence at 1:00 pm Eastern Time on November 5, 2018, on the 9th floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
`Petitioner requests 60 minutes of argument time, and Patent Owner
`requests 90 minutes. Paper 29, 3; Paper 30, 1. Petitioner and Patent Owner
`each shall have 60 minutes of total time to present arguments, divided
`between IPR2017-01654, IPR2017-01890, and IPR2017-01945 as each
`party sees fit. The hearing will proceed as follows. Petitioner will open the
`hearing by presenting its case regarding the challenged claims. Patent
`Owner then will respond to Petitioner’s presentation. Petitioner may reserve
`rebuttal time (of no more than half its total argument time) to reply to Patent
`Owner’s arguments. Patent Owner may reserve sur-rebuttal time to respond
`only to Petitioner’s rebuttal.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. The
`
`
`1 Although the hearing in IPR2017-01654 originally was scheduled to be
`held October 22, 2018, the parties jointly requested continuing that hearing
`until November 5, 2018, to be held jointly with the hearings in IPR2017-
`01890 and IPR2017-01945. IPR2017-01654, Paper 32; IPR2017-01654,
`Paper 33. We granted that request, and we will hold hearings in all three
`cases on November 5, 2018.
`2 Our citations are to the record in IPR2017-01890. Similar filings are
`present in IPR2017-01654 and IPR2017-01945.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance that will be
`accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis.
`The parties shall serve on opposing counsel demonstrative exhibits no
`later than October 29, 2018. The parties also shall provide the
`demonstrative exhibits to the Board at least three business days prior to the
`hearing by emailing them to Trials@uspto.gov. The parties shall not file
`any demonstrative exhibits in this proceeding without prior authorization
`from the Board. A hard copy of the demonstrative exhibits should be
`provided to the court reporter at the hearing.
`We remind the parties that demonstrative exhibits are not evidence,
`but are intended to assist the parties in presenting their oral arguments to the
`Board. We also remind the parties that demonstrative exhibits are not a
`mechanism for making arguments not previously addressed in the papers.
`The parties are directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The
`Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, Case IPR2013-00041
`(PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate
`content of demonstrative exhibits, which must include citations to the
`record.
`To the extent that the parties object to the propriety of any
`demonstrative exhibits, we expect the parties will meet and confer in good
`faith to resolve any objections to demonstrative exhibits. If such objections
`cannot be resolved, the parties may file objections to demonstratives with
`the Board at least two business days before the hearing. The objections
`should identify with particularity the portions of each demonstrative exhibit
`subject to objection, include a copy of the objected-to portions, and include a
`one-sentence statement of the reason for each objection. No further
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`argument or explanation is permitted. We will consider any objections and
`schedule a conference call if deemed necessary. Otherwise, we will reserve
`ruling on the objections. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits that is not
`timely presented will be considered waived.
`At least one member of the panel will be attending the hearing
`electronically from a remote location and may not be able to view the
`projection screen in the hearing room. In particular, documents presented on
`the Elmo projector are not visible to remote judges, so please plan
`accordingly. If a demonstrative exhibit is not made available or visible to
`the judge(s) presiding over the hearing remotely, that demonstrative will not
`be considered. 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 the judge(s) presiding over the hearing remotely. Because of
`limitations of the audio transmission systems in our hearing rooms, the
`presenter may speak only when standing at the hearing room lectern.
`No live witness testimony shall be taken at the oral argument. The
`Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person at the oral
`hearing. However, any counsel of record may present the party’s argument.
`If either party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending the oral
`argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference with the
`Board no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to discuss the
`matter.
`Any requests for audiovisual equipment should be directed to
`Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for equipment will not be honored unless
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`presented in a separate communication not less than three business days
`before the hearing, directed to the above email address.
`
`
`
`
`It is
`ORDERED that the parties’ requests for oral hearing are granted
`subject to the conditions set forth in this Order; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that an oral hearing, conducted pursuant to
`the procedures outlined above, shall commence at 1:00 PM Eastern Time on
`November 5, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case IPR2017-01654 (Patent 9,079,490 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01890 (Patent 9,399,327 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01945 (Patent 9,399,326 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`Alyssa Caridis
`Bas de Blank
`Donald Daybell
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON, & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`a8cptabdocket@orrick.com
`m2bptabdocket@orrick.com
`d2dptabdocket@orrick.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Robert C. Mattson
`Vincent Shier
`Christopher Ricciuti
`OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, LLP
`cpdocketmattson@oblon.com
`cpdocketshier@oblon.com
`cpdocketricciuti@oblon.com
`
`
`6
`
`

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