`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 7
`Date: November 25, 2019
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BLOOMREACH, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GUADA TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2019-01304
`Patent 7,231,379
`____________
`
`
`Before MIRIAM L. QUINN, KIMBERLY McGRAW, and
`MATTHEW J. McNEILL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McNEILL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Denying Petitioner’s Request to File a Reply
`to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`On November 4, 2019, the Board received an email from Petitioner
`
`requesting authorization to file a reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary
`
`Response (Paper 6, “Prelim. Resp.”). Petitioner requested authorization to
`
`respond to Patent Owner’s proposed constructions and related arguments
`
`regarding the phrases “jumping to the at least one node,” “jumping to the
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01304
`Patent 7,231,379
`
`vertex,” and “jumping.” Petitioner’s email indicated Patent Owner opposes
`
`Petitioner’s request.
`
`In the Petition (Paper 1, “Pet.”), Petitioner proposed a construction for
`
`the term “jumping,” but did not propose explicit constructions for “jumping
`
`to the at least one node” or “jumping to the vertex.” See Pet. 10‒15. In
`
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, Patent Owner proposed the same
`
`construction for “jumping” as Petitioner. Prelim. Resp. 2 n.1. Patent Owner
`
`also proposed explicitly construing “jumping to the [at least one
`
`node/vertex]” to mean “the system jumping to the [at least one
`
`node/vertex].” Id.
`
`On November 18, 2019, Judges McNeill, McGraw, and Quinn
`
`initiated a conference call regarding Petitioner’s request. On the line for
`
`Patent Owner was Isaac Rabicoff. Petitioner failed to attend the scheduled
`
`conference call.
`
`Although Board rules do not specifically authorize a reply to a Patent
`
`Owner’s Preliminary Response, a Petitioner may seek leave to file such a
`
`reply, and any such request must make a showing of good cause. 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.108(c). Based on the totality of the circumstances, we are not persuaded
`
`that Petitioner has shown good cause for filing a reply to Patent Owner’s
`
`Preliminary Response.
`
`
`
`
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Request for Authorization to File a Reply
`
`to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response is denied.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01304
`Patent 7,231,379
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Dion Bregman
`Michael Lyons
`Ahren Hsu-Hoffman
`MORGAN LEWIS
`dion.bregman@morganlewis.com
`michael.lyons@morganlewis.com
`ahren.hsu-hoffman@morganlewis.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Isaac Rabicoff
`RABICOFF LAW
`isaac@rabilaw.com
`
`3
`
`
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
