IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`Filed on behalf of Supercell Oy
`
`By:
`
`JENNIFER R. BUSH, Reg. No 50,784
`MICHAEL J. SACKSTEDER
`BRIAN HOFFMAN, Reg. No. 39,713
`KEVIN X. MCGANN, Reg. No. 48,793
`GREGORY HOPEWELL, Reg. No. 66,012
`GEOFFREY MILLER
`ERIC ZHOU, Reg. No. 68,842
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`801 California Street
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`Telephone: 650.988.8500
`Facsimile: 650.938.5200
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`GREE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01619
`Patent 10,413,832 B2
`_____________
`PETITIONER’S MOTION TO EXPUNGE CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`Filed on behalf of Supercell Oy
`
`By:
`
`JENNIFER R. BUSH, Reg. No 50,784
`MICHAEL J. SACKSTEDER
`BRIAN HOFFMAN, Reg. No. 39,713
`KEVIN X. MCGANN, Reg. No. 48,793
`GREGORY HOPEWELL, Reg. No. 66,012
`GEOFFREY MILLER
`ERIC ZHOU, Reg. No. 68,842
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`801 California Street
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`Telephone: 650.988.8500
`Facsimile: 650.938.5200
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`GREE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case No. IPR2020-01619
`Patent 10,413,832 B2
`_____________
`PETITIONER’S MOTION TO EXPUNGE CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I.
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS ......................................................... 1
`II.
`III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR EXPUNGING THE
`CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT ................................................................... 2
`IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Page(s)
`
`CASES
`Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc.,
`IPR2013-00453, Paper 97 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 15, 2015) ........................................... 2
`STATUTES AND RULES
`35 U.S.C. § 324(a) ..................................................................................................... 3
`OTHER AUTHORITIES
`37 C.F.R. § 42.56 ................................................................................................... 1, 3
`Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48,761 ............................................................. 1
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`
`EXHIBIT LIST (37 CFR § 42.63(E))
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,076,708 to Yoshikawa
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,076,708
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,413,832 to Yoshikawa
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,413,832
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,583,365 to Yoshikawa
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 10,583,365
`
`Expert Declaration of Ravin Balakrishnan
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Ravin Balakrishnan
`
`Robert Corrina, “What is a Role Playing Game?,” Gamasutra
`
`“Secret of Monkey Island, The Download (Adventure Game),”
`old-games.com
`
`Final Fantasy VI Advance Instruction Booklet, Nintendo of America
`
`Daniel Primed, “Wasteland Ventures (Fallout) #5 – 3 Forms of Grind,”
`Daniel Primed
`
`“Microsoft Excel 2003 for Beginners,” California State University,
`Northridge, Information Technology Training Guide
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,643,454 to Ondis (“Ondis”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,147,316 to Arezina et al. (“Arezina”)
`
`Sarah Phillips, “A brief history of Facebook,” The Guardian
`
`1017 Michael Arrington, “Social Games: How the Big Three Make
`Millions,” TechCrunch
`
`iii
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`Juha-Matti Vanhatupa, “Browser Games for Online Communities,”
`International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN),
`Vol. 2, No. 3, August 2010
`
`“FarmVille for Dummies” by Angela Morales and Kyle Orland, ISBN:
`978-1-118-01696-1 (“FVD”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,843,853 to Smoak et al. (“Smoak”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,357,718 to Yamaoka et al. (“Yamaoka”)
`
`U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0129590 to Morrisroe et al. (“Morrisroe”)
`
`Plaintiff's Opening Claim Construction Brief, Dkt. 63, Filed July 24,
`2020 (ED Texas 2:19-cv-00310-JRG-RSP)
`
`Patent Owner's Preliminary Response Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.207,
`Case PGR2020-00053
`
`Scott McKeown, Congress Urged to Investigate PTAB Discretionary
`Denials, Patents Post-Grant (June 30, 2020)
`
`Scott McKeown, District Court Trial Dates Tend to Slip After PTAB
`Discretionary Denials, Patents Post-Grant (July 24, 2020)
`
`GREE, Inc.’s Opposition to Supercell Oy’s Motion for Relief in View
`of Governmental / Public Health Restrictions in Response to Covid-19
`Impact, Dkt. 102, Entered April 29, 2020 (ED Texas
`2:19-cv-00161-JRG-RSP)
`
`Fourth Amended Docket Control Order, Dkt. 102, Entered
`April 29, 2020 (ED Texas 2:19-cv-00310)
`
`GREE, Inc.’s Paragraph 1 and 3 Initial and Additional Disclosures,
`February 18, 2020 (ED Texas 2:19-cv-00310-JRG-RSP))
`
`Supercell Oy’s Notice of Deposition of Tomoki Yasuhara,
`August 24, 2020 (ED Texas 2:19-cv-00310-JRG-RSP,
`2:19-cv-00311-JRG-RSP)
`
`iv
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`Supercell Oy’s Notice of Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Plaintiff
`Gree, Inc., August 7, 2020 (ED Texas 2:19-cv-310-JGR-RSP,
`2:19-cv-00311)
`
`Sixth Amended Docket Control Order [Dkt 94], entered on October 23,
`2020, Case No. 19-cv-00311 (E.D. Texas)
`
`Order (Granting Continuance of In-Person Jury Trials) (Dkt. 261),
`entered on November 20, 2020, Infernal Technology, LLC, et al. v.
`Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, Case. No. 19-cv-00248 (E.D.
`Texas)
`
`Texas COVID-19 Active Case Data By County, available at
`https://dshs.state.tx.us/coronavirus/TexasCOVID-
`19ActiveCaseDatabyCounty.xlsx (retrieved February 8, 2021).
`
`Texas Department of State Health Services Website, Texas COVID-19
`Data, available at https://dshs.texas.gov/coronavirus/additionaldata.aspx
`(retrieved February 8, 2021).
`
`New coronavirus variant could take over by spring, experts day,
`The Dallas Morning News, Jan. 16, 2021, available at
`https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2021/01/16/new-coronavirus-variant-
`could-take-over-by-spring-experts-say/.
`
`Katie Buehler, COVID-19 Outbreak Leads to Mistrial in EDTX,
`Law360 (Nov. 17, 2020),
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1329617/covid-19-outbreak-leads-to-
`mistrial-in-edtx
`
`Order entered on November 20, 2020, Solas OLED Ltd. v. Samsung
`Display Co., Ltd., [Dkt 302], Case No. 2:19-cv-00152-JRG
`
`Amended Docket Control Order, entered October 7, 2020 [Dkt. 81],
`Civil Case No. 19-cv-00310-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.).
`
`Email from Michael Morlock to Fenwick & West, February 22, 2021
`regarding reduction to claims at issue, GREE, Inc. v. Supercell Oy,
`E.D. Texas Case Nos. 2:19-cv-00200, -00237, -00310, -00311
`
`v
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`Email from Adrienne Dellinger, Law Clerk to Chief Judge Rodney
`Gilstrap, Feb. 25, 2021, regarding Order of Trials for March 2021
`(E.D. Texas)
`
`Email from Taylor Mauze, Law Clerk to Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap,
`March 2, 2021, regarding March 15, 2021 Jury Selection and Trial
`Procedures (E.D. Texas)
`
`Report and Recommendation entered on April 16, 2021 (regarding
`Supercell Oy’s Motions for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Under
`35 U.S.C. § 101), Civil Case Nos. 19-cv-00200, -00237, -00310, and
`-00311-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.)
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1043
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.56, Petitioner Supercell Oy (“Supercell” or
`
`I.
`
`“Petitioner”) respectfully requests that certain confidential information in the
`
`record be expunged. This motion is authorized by the Board’s March 24, 2021
`
`Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review, . . . Dismissing Petitioner’s
`
`Motion to Seal (Paper 15). For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner respectfully
`
`requests that certain papers and documents be expunged.
`
`Specifically, Petitioner requests that Exhibit 1029 (Plaintiff GREE, Inc.’s
`
`Paragraph 1 and 3 Initial and Additional Disclosures) for which a Motion to Seal
`
`was filed on September 14, 2020 as Paper 3, be expunged from the record, as this
`
`document contains Patent Owner’s highly confidential business information.
`
`II. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS
`37 CFR § 42.56 provides that following “denial of a petition to institute a
`
`trial or after final judgment in a trial, a party may file a motion to expunge
`
`confidential information from the record.” The Trial Practice Guide states that
`
`“[t]here is an expectation that information will be made public where the existence
`
`of the information is referred to in a decision to grant or deny a request to institute
`
`a review or is identified in a final written decision following a trial.” Trial Practice
`
`Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48,761. However, the Trial Practice Guide also states that a
`
`party “seeking to maintain the confidentiality of information . . . may file a motion
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`to expunge the information from the record prior to the information becoming
`
`public.” A party seeking expungement from the record must show good cause by
`
`demonstrating “that any information sought to be expunged constitutes confidential
`
`information, and that Petitioner’s interest in expunging it outweighs the public’s
`
`interest in maintaining a complete and understandable history of this inter partes
`
`review.” Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc., IPR2013-
`
`00453, Paper 97 at 2 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 15, 2015).
`
`III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR EXPUNGING THE CONFIDENTIAL
`DOCUMENT
`In this proceeding, the Board entered its Decision Denying Institution of
`
`Inter Partes Review, . . . Dismissing Petitioner’s Motion to Seal, authorizing
`
`Petitioner to file a motion to expunge Exhibit 1029 “within 90 days after the date
`
`of entry of [the Board’s] Decision or, if a request for rehearing is filed, within
`
`90 days after the date of entry of a decision on the request.” (Paper 15) On August
`
`18, 2021, Petitioner filed an Unopposed Motion to Withdraw Request for
`
`Rehearing (Paper 23) and on August 23, 2021, the Board granted Petitioner’s
`
`Unopposed Motion (Paper 24).
`
`As set forth in the Motion to Seal (Paper 3), the document contains Patent
`
`Owner’s confidential and highly sensitive business confidential information,
`
`disclosure of which would adversely harm Patent Owner, while expungement of
`
`which would not significantly impact the public’s interest in maintaining a
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`complete and understandable file history. Expunging Exhibit 1029 also protects a
`
`sensitive District Court Litigation document served by GREE, Inc.
`
`To the best of Petitioner’s knowledge, Exhibit 1029 has never been
`
`published or otherwise made public. Patent Owner and Petitioner made efforts to
`
`maintain the confidentiality of this information in the Civil Action. In the Civil
`
`Action, Exhibit 1029 was produced pursuant to a Protective Order agreed upon by
`
`the Parties, and was designated “CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY”
`
`pursuant to that Protective Order.
`
`Additionally, the Board did not rely on Exhibit 1029 in its denial of
`
`institution in this proceeding. See Paper 15 (discretional denial under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 324(a)). Thus, there is no public interest in now making Patent Owner’s
`
`confidential information publicly available.
`
`Accordingly, good cause exists to expunge the confidential document.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`For the above reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board protect
`
`Petitioner’s highly confidential business information and expunge the confidential
`
`document pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.56.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 18, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`
`/Jennifer R. Bush/
`Jennifer R, Bush
`Reg. No. 50,784
`Attorneys for Petitioner Supercell Oy
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01619
`Petitioner’s Motion to Expunge Confidential Document
`
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE ON PATENT OWNER
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing Petitioner’s Motion to
`
`Expunge Confidential Document was served on Patent Owner’s lead and back-up
`
`counsel in its entirety by electronic service at the email addresses provided below:
`
`Andrew W. Rinehart
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1001 West Fourth Street
`Winston-Salem, NC 27101
`arinehart@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Scott A. McKeown
`Ropes & Gray
`2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 2006
`scott.mckeown@ropesgray.com
`
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`
`/Jennifer R. Bush/
`Jennifer R. Bush
`Reg. No. 50,784
`Attorneys for Petitioner Supercell Oy
`
`
`
`
`John C. Alemanni
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`4208 Six Forks Road, Suite 1400
`Raleigh, NC 27609
`jalemanni@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Joshua H. Lee
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1100 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 2800
`Atlanta, GA 30309-6582
`jlee@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`Dated: October 18, 2021
`Fenwick & West LLP
`801 California Street
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
