`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 17
`Entered: October 7, 2021
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`TWITTER, INC. and GOOGLE LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`_______________
`
`IPR2021-00483 (Patent 8,769,440 B2)
`IPR2021-00484 (Patent 8,549,410 B2)
`IPR2021-00485 (Patent 8,549,411 B2)1
`_______________
`
`
`NEIL T. POWELL, MIRIAM L. QUINN, and IFTIKHAR AHMED,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5(a)
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the listed cases. Given the similarities of issues, we
`issue one Order to be docketed in each case. The parties are not authorized to use
`this caption style.
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00483 (Patent 8,769,440 B2)
`IPR2021-00484 (Patent 8,549,410 B2)
`IPR2021-00485 (Patent 8,549,411 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The parties have contacted the Board after they met and conferred
`concerning a request for authorization to file a motion: Motion to Submit
`Supplemental Information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123(a) (“Motion”). Ex. 3001.
`Petitioner desires to submit declarations in support of the printed publication status
`of certain references involved in the captioned proceedings. The Motion is
`prompted by Patent Owner’s objections to the evidence presented with the Petition.
`Patent Owner does not object to Petitioner’s request, except it seeks to limit the
`issues addressed in the submitted declarations solely to the printed publication
`issue “rather than attempt to cure evidentiary objections.” Id.
`Our rules and binding precedent make clear that a motion for supplemental
`information is one of two ways Petitioner may submit a declaration supporting its
`argument that a reference qualifies as a printed publication. Hulu, LLC, v. Sound
`View Innovations, LLC, IPR2018-01039, Paper 29 at 15 (PTAB Dec. 20, 2019)
`(Decision) (precedential). Given that Patent Owner does not object in principle to
`Petitioner’s request, we find the request timely and appropriate under these
`circumstances. Accordingly, we grant Petitioner’s request. Petitioner’s Motion
`may address the requirements of Rule 123(a) including a brief explanation of the
`relevance of the information submitted to the claim for which trial has been
`instituted. 37 C.F.R. § 42.123(a)(2). The Opposition may only respond to issues
`raised in the Motion, and the Reply may only respond to issues raised in the
`Opposition. 37 C.F.R. § 42.33. The following schedule shall apply to the
`authorized filings.
`Paper
`Motion to Submit Supplemental Information
`Opposition to the Motion
`Reply to the Opposition
`
`Due Date
`October 15, 2021
`October 26, 2021
`November 1, 2021
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00483 (Patent 8,769,440 B2)
`IPR2021-00484 (Patent 8,549,410 B2)
`IPR2021-00485 (Patent 8,549,411 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`IT IS, therefore,
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s request to file a Motion to Submit
`Supplemental Information under 37 C.F.R. § 123(a) is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that an Opposition and Reply are authorized to be
`filed according to the schedule identified in this Order.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00483 (Patent 8,769,440 B2)
`IPR2021-00484 (Patent 8,549,410 B2)
`IPR2021-00485 (Patent 8,549,411 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`David McCombs (Lead Counsel)
`Raghav Bajaj
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`David.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Raghav.bajaj.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`Andrew Baluch
`Amy Greywitt
`Matthew Smith
`SMITH BALUCH LLP
`baluch@smithbaluch.com
`greywitt@smithbaluch.com
`smith@smithbaluch.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`Andrea Pacelli (Lead Counsel)
`Michael DeVincenzo
`Charles Wizenfeld
`KING & WOOD MALLESONS LLP
`Andrea.pacelli@us.kwm.com
`Michael.devincenzo@us.kwm.com
`Charles.wizenfeld@us.kwm.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
