`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Entered: January 13, 2021
`
`571-272-7822
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`XILINX, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ARBOR GLOBAL STRATEGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2020-01567 (Patent 7,126,214 B2)
`IPR2020-01568 (Patent 7,282,951 B2)
`IPR2020-01570 (Patent RE42,035 E)
`IPR2020-01571 (Patent 6,781,226 B2)1
`_______________
`
`
`Before KARL D. EASTHOM, BARBARA A. BENOIT, and
`SHARON FENICK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`FENICK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`On January 4, 2021, we held a teleconference in the above-captioned
`proceedings.
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the listed cases. The parties are not
`authorized to use this caption for subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01567 (Patent 7,126,214 B2)
`IPR2020-01568 (Patent 7,282,951 B2)
`IPR2020-01570 (Patent RE42,035 E)
`IPR2020-01571 (Patent 6,781,226 B2)
`
`
`Petitioner requested authorization to file as an exhibit, in each of the
`captioned proceedings, the infringement contentions from a civil action
`pending in the District of Delaware, Arbor Global Strategies LLC v. Xilinx,
`Inc., DDE-1-19-cv-01986 (“the related action”). The related action concerns
`the patents at issue in these proceedings. See Paper 22 (Petition), 68–69; Ex.
`1013 (complaint in the related action), 3–6.
`Petitioner represented that the proposed exhibit would explain which
`claims are being asserted in the related action, and that this would provide
`information useful for the Board in considering arguments that the Board
`should exercise its discretion to deny institution under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
`See Paper 7 (Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response), 2–17.
`We agree that it would be useful to have information regarding which
`claims are being asserted in the related action. In this case, as indicated in
`the teleconference, a joint stipulation regarding the claims asserted would be
`preferable. Petitioner, during the teleconference, agreed that such a
`stipulation would provide the same information to the Board. Additionally,
`as no arguments relating to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) have been raised by Patent
`Owner in IPR2020-01567, Petitioner indicated that such a filing would not
`be necessary in that proceeding. See IPR2020-01567, Paper 9 (Patent
`Owner’s Preliminary Response).
`
`
`2 Unless otherwise indicated, we refer to papers and exhibits in IPR2020-
`01568.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01567 (Patent 7,126,214 B2)
`IPR2020-01568 (Patent 7,282,951 B2)
`IPR2020-01570 (Patent RE42,035 E)
`IPR2020-01571 (Patent 6,781,226 B2)
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons,
`it is ORDERED that, in each of IPR2020-01568, IPR2020-01570, and
`IPR2020-01571, Petitioner and Patent owner shall file a joint stipulation,
`indicating which claims are the subject of infringement contentions filed in
`the related action.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01567 (Patent 7,126,214 B2)
`IPR2020-01568 (Patent 7,282,951 B2)
`IPR2020-01570 (Patent RE42,035 E)
`IPR2020-01571 (Patent 6,781,226 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`David M. Hoffman
`Kenneth W. Darby Jr.
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`hoffman@fr.com
`kdarby@fr.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Jonathan S. Caplan
`James Hannah
`Jeffrey H. Price
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`jcaplan@kramerlevin.com
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`jprice@kramerlevin.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
