`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 28
` Entered: January 24, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`IEE SENSING, INC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DELPHI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before HYUN J. JUNG, CARL M. DEFRANCO, and
`JAMES J. MAYBERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JUNG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`
`
`
`
`The parties requested oral argument pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 in
`
`the above-captioned proceeding. Papers 22, 25. The parties’ requests are
`
`granted.
`
`Oral argument for the proceeding will commence at 10:00 AM
`
`Eastern Time on February 12, 2019, on the ninth floor of Madison Building
`
`East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. As stated on the
`
`Office’s website (uspto.gov), “[a]lthough parts of the federal government
`
`have experienced a lapse in appropriated funding, the USPTO remains open
`
`for business as normal . . . because the agency has access to prior-year fee
`
`collections, which enables the USPTO to continue normal operations for a
`
`few weeks.” The parties should monitor the Office’s website to verify that
`
`the Office will be open on the date scheduled for oral argument. If the
`
`Office is closed on that date, the Board will provide further guidance as soon
`
`as the Office reopens.
`
`The hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance, and
`
`in-person attendance 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.
`
`Petitioner requests one (1) hour of total time to present argument.
`
`Paper 22, 2. Patent Owner requests forty-five (45) minutes of total time to
`
`present argument. Paper 25, 2. We allocate each party one (1) hour of total
`
`argument time. The parties may use their one hour to present their
`
`arguments as they see fit. If the panel requires a lengthy examination of a
`
`party’s argument, the panel may extend argument time. If the panel extends
`
`argument time for one party, the panel will extend argument time for the
`
`other party by an equal amount.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the claims at issue
`
`are unpatentable. The burden of persuasion with respect to the patentability
`
`of proposed substitute claims presented in the contingent motion to amend is
`
`not placed on the Patent Owner. See Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, 872 F.3d
`
`1290, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (stating that “the PTO may not place that
`
`burden [of persuasion with respect to the patentability of amended claims]
`
`on the patentee”). Therefore, at the hearing, Petitioner will proceed first to
`
`present its arguments with regard to the challenged claims and grounds on
`
`which basis we instituted trial in this proceeding. Petitioner may reserve
`
`rebuttal time. Thereafter, Patent Owner will argue its opposition to
`
`Petitioner’s case and present the issues for which it bears the ultimate
`
`burden. Patent Owner may also reserve rebuttal time. To the extent
`
`Petitioner reserves rebuttal time, Petitioner then may make use of its rebuttal
`
`time responding to Patent Owner. To the extent Patent Owner reserves
`
`rebuttal time, Patent Owner then may make use of its rebuttal time
`
`responding to Petitioner.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`
`least seven business days before the hearing. The parties also shall file a
`
`copy of the demonstratives as an exhibit at least seven business days prior to
`
`the hearing. Each party shall provide a hard copy of its demonstratives to
`
`the court reporter at the hearing. The parties are directed to St. Jude
`
`Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the University
`
`of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65), for guidance
`
`regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits. The parties
`
`shall meet and confer to discuss any objections to demonstrative exhibits at
`
`least three business days before the hearing. If any issues regarding
`
`demonstratives remain unresolved after the parties meet and confer, the
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`
`
`
`
`parties shall file jointly a one-page list of objections to the demonstrative
`
`exhibits at least two business days before the hearing. For each objection,
`
`the list must identify with particularity the demonstratives subject to the
`
`objection and include a short, one-sentence statement explaining the
`
`objection. The panel will consider the objections and schedule a conference
`
`call if necessary. Otherwise, rulings on the objections will be reserved until
`
`the hearing or after the hearing. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits not
`
`presented timely will be considered waived.
`
`The parties are reminded that demonstrative exhibits are visual aids to
`
`oral argument and not evidence, and should be clearly marked as such. For
`
`example, each slide may be marked with the words “DEMONSTRATIVE
`
`EXHIBIT – NOT EVIDENCE” in the footer. Demonstrative exhibits may
`
`not be used to advance arguments or introduce evidence not previously
`
`presented in the record. See Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC, 884 F.3d 1364,
`
`1369 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (noting that the “Board was obligated to dismiss [the
`
`petitioner’s] untimely argument . . . raised for the first time during oral
`
`argument”). Instead, demonstrative exhibits should cite to the briefs and
`
`evidence in the record.
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`
`at the 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 hearing, that party should initiate a joint telephone conference
`
`with the other party and the panel no later than three business days prior to
`
`the hearing to discuss the matter.
`
`Per the recent update to the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, either
`
`party may request a pre-hearing conference (Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide, August 2018 Update, 83 Fed. Reg. 39,989 (Aug. 13, 2018) (found at
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`
`
`
`
`the following link to the USPTO website: https://go.usa.gov/xU7GP)).
`
`Requests for a pre-hearing conference must be made by January 31, 2019.
`
`To request such a conference, an email should be sent to Trials@uspto.gov
`
`including several dates and times of availability for one or both parties, as
`
`appropriate, that are generally no later than three business days prior to the
`
`oral hearing. Please refer to the Guide for more information on the
`
`prehearing conference.
`
`Requests for audio-visual equipment are to be made five business days
`
`in advance of the hearing date. The 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.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that oral argument will commence at 10:00 AM Eastern
`
`Time on February 12, 2019, in Alexandria, Virginia.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00179
`Patent 8,500,194 B2
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Frank Angileri
`fangileri@brookskushman.com
`
`Brian Doughty
`bdoughty@brookskushman.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jason Mudd
`Jason.mudd@eriseip.com
`
`Eric Buresh
`Eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`
`Mark Lang
`Mark.lang@eriseip.com
`
`
`6
`
`