`571-272-7822
`
`Paper No. 25
`Entered: June 21, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`TELESIGN CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TWILIO INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2017-01976 (Patent 8,837,465 B2)
`Case IPR2017-01977 (Patent 8,755,376 B2)1
`_______________
`
`Before ROBERT J. WEINSCHENK, KIMBERLY MCGRAW, and
`SCOTT C. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WEINSCHENK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Granting Joint Motion for Modification of Default Protective Order
`37 C.F.R. § 42.54
`
`1 This Order pertains to both of these cases. Therefore, we exercise our
`discretion to issue a single Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not
`authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01976 (Patent 8,837,465 B2)
`IPR2017-01977 (Patent 8,755,376 B2)
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`TeleSign Corporation (“Petitioner”) and Twilio Inc. (“Patent Owner”)
`filed a Joint Motion for Modification of Default Protective Order. Paper 232
`(“Motion” or “Mot.”). The parties request entry of a proposed Protective
`Order that differs from the Board’s default Protective Order. Id. at 2. The
`parties submit a clean version of the proposed Protective Order as Appendix
`A to the Motion and a redline version of the proposed Protective Order as
`Appendix B to the Motion. Id. at Appx. A, Appx. B. For the reasons
`discussed below, the Motion is granted.
`II. ANALYSIS
`The parties previously filed a joint motion for entry of a protective
`order. Paper 19, 2. We denied that motion without prejudice because of
`certain proposed modifications to Sections 4(A)(i), (ii) of the Board’s default
`Protective Order. Id. at 2–5. We explained that the parties may submit
`another joint motion for entry of a protective order with a proposed
`Protective Order that omits those specific proposed modifications to
`Sections 4(A)(i), (ii) of the default Protective Order, and also clarifies
`Section 3 of the proposed Protective Order (which adds a designation for
`Highly Confidential information) to indicate that the individuals identified in
`Sections 2(F), 2(G) shall have access to such information without the
`requirement to sign an Acknowledgement. Id. at 5–6. The parties’ current
`Motion includes a proposed Protective Order that is consistent with our
`previous instructions. Mot. 1–2, Appx. B. Therefore, after considering the
`
`
`2 We cite to the record of IPR2017-01976, unless otherwise noted.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01976 (Patent 8,837,465 B2)
`IPR2017-01977 (Patent 8,755,376 B2)
`
`Motion and the Appendices thereto, we hereby enter the Protective Order
`included as Appendix A to the Motion in the above-identified proceedings.
`III. ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the Motion (IPR2017-01976, Paper 23; IPR2017-
`01977, Paper 24) is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Protective Order included as
`Appendix A to the Motion (IPR2017-01976, Paper 23; IPR2017-01977,
`Paper 24) is entered in the above-identified proceedings.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01976 (Patent 8,837,465 B2)
`IPR2017-01977 (Patent 8,755,376 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Jesse J. Camacho
`Elena K. McFarland
`Christine Guastello
`Mary J. Peal
`SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
`jcamacho@shb.com
`emcfarland@shb.com
`cguastello@shb.com
`telesignipr@shb.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Wayne Stacy
`Michelle Jacobson Eber
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`wayne.stacy@bakerbotts.com
`michelle.eber@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`4
`
`
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
