`Patent No. 9,770,659
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`Supercell Oy,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`GREE, Inc.,
`Patent Owner.
`_____________
`
`PGR2018-00047
`Patent No. 9,770,659
`_____________
`
`PETITIONER SUPERCELL OY’S REQUEST FOR
`ORAL ARGUMENT PURSUANT 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`30646/96003/FW/10691958.1
`
`
`
`PGR2018-00047
`Patent No. 9,770,659
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F. R. § 42.70(a) and the Board’s August 20, 2018 Scheduling
`
`Order (Paper 28), Petitioner Supercell Oy hereby requests oral argument on the issues
`
`set forth below at a time set by the Board. Pursuant to the Board’s March 29, 2019
`
`Order, Patent Owner understands that oral argument is currently scheduled for
`
`June 21, 2019. Petitioner proposes that argument in this case be consolidated with
`
`the hearing in PGR2018-00029, which is also scheduled for June 21, 2019, and
`
`involves a related patent, Patent No. 9,636,583. The patent at issue in this
`
`proceeding is a continuation of Patent No. 9,636,583 and involves overlapping
`
`subject matter and disputed issues.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a), Petitioner respectfully requests up to
`
`ninety (90) minutes of oral argument for both Petitioner and Patent Owner for the
`
`consolidated hearings (PGR2018-00029 and PGR2018-00047) on all issues raised
`
`in the papers in each case, including the Petition, Patent Owner’s Preliminary
`
`Response, Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, Patent
`
`Owner’s Sur-Reply, the Board’s Institution Decision, Patent Owner’s Request for
`
`Reconsideration, Decision on Request for Rehearing, Patent Owner’s Response,
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response, and Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply.
`
`
`
`1
`
`30646/96003/FW/10691958.1
`
`
`
`PGR2018-00047
`Patent No. 9,770,659
`
`
`Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board provide audio/visual equipment
`
`to display demonstrative exhibits and evidence of record, including the use of a
`
`projector and screen for displaying documents.
`
`Petitioner requests oral argument on all issues raised in the parties’ filings,
`
`including but not limited to the following:
`
`1.
`
`Whether claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 9,770,659 are unpatentable
`
`based on the grounds on which the Board instituted trial.
`
`Any issues specified by Patent Owner in a request for oral argument.
`
`Rebuttal to Patent Owner’s presentation on all matters.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: April 22, 2019
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`/Jennifer R. Bush/
`
`JENNIFER R. BUSH
`Reg. No. 50,784
`Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`30646/96003/FW/10691958.1
`
`
`
`PGR2018-00047
`Patent No. 9,770,659
`
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6, the undersigned certifies that on April 22, 2019, I
`
`caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing PETITIONER SUPERCELL OY’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT PURSUANT 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a) to be electronically
`
`served on Patent Owner’s lead and backup counsel at the following addresses:
`
`John C. Alemanni
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`42088 Six Forks Road, Suite 1400
`Raleigh, NC 27609
`
`jalemanni@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Scott E. Kolassa
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1080 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`
`skolassa@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Dated: April 22, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`Andrew Rinehart
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1001 West Fourth Street
`Winston-Salem, NC 2710-2400
`
`arinehart@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Steven D. Moore
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1900
`San Francisco, CA 9411
`
`smoore@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`
`
`/Jennifer R. Bush/
`JENNIFER R. BUSH
`Reg. No. 50,784
`Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`30646/96003/FW/10691958.1
`
`