In its Order, the Board denied the parties’ stipulated motion to extend time for Patent Owner’s preliminary response to the Petition. Patent Owner had emailed the Board on behalf of both parties “seeking a two-month extension of the filing deadline for Patent Owner’s preliminary response, in light of ongoing settlement negotiations.” The parties further agreed “to expedite the proceedings if inter partes review is instituted.” Continue reading
Category Archives: Preliminary Response
Reply to Preliminary Response Authorized To Address Standing CBM2015-00168, 178
In its Order, the Board authorized Petitioner to file a Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response limited to addressing Petitioner’s interpretation of statutes and regulations related to the issue of standing. The Board also authorized Petitioner to file an additional briefing regarding the claim construction issue. Continue reading
Denying Request to File Reply to Preliminary Response IPR2015-01769,70
Denying Motion for Leave to File Motion to Submit New Testimonial Evidence IPR2015-00594
In its Order, the Board denied Patent Owner’s request to file new testimonial evidence under 37 C.F.R. § 42.107(c). The parties had a conference call with the Board to discuss Patent Owner’s request to submit the testimonial evidence. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.107(c), a patent owner’s preliminary response “shall not present new testimony evidence beyond that already of record, except as authorized by the Board.” Generally, a patent owner submits testimonial evidence in its response after institution. Continue reading
Denying Motion for Joinder CBM2015-00009
In its Decision, the Board denied Petitioner’s Motion for Joinder seeking to join the already-instituted CBM2014-00100 in light of the Board’s decision to institute trial in the instant Petition. Continue reading
Final Written Decision IPR2013-00499
In its Final Written Decision, the Board concluded that Petitioner had shown by a preponderance of the evidence that all claims of the ’429 patent for which trial was instituted are unpatentable. The claims for which trial had been instituted were claims 15–21, 23–26, 29–32, 34, 36, 37, 39, 41–50, 52–58, 60, 62–67, and 70–76. Continue reading
Expunging Preliminary Response IPR2015-00009
In its Order, the Board ordered that the Preliminary Response filed by Fluidigm will be expunged unless within five business days of the Board’s Order, a paper is filed “that shows cause why Fluidigm should be entitled to file a preliminary response to the Petitions.” Continue reading
Order Granting Motion to Expedite IPR2015-00580
In its Order, the Board granted Petitioner’s request to expedite Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response. Also, the Board authorized Petitioner to submit a reply to Patent Owner’s Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion for Joinder in the event that Patent Owner elects to file an opposition to the Motion for Joinder. Continue reading
Order on Request to Expunge Evidence or Argument CBM2014-00182
In its Order, the Board ruled on Petitioner’s request that the Board expunge certain exhibits from the record and strike any corresponding argument in Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response. According to Petitioner, the exhibits and Preliminary Response included new testimonial evidence in violation of 37 C.F.R. 42.207(c). Continue reading
Decision on Institution IPR2014-1203
In its Decision, the Board concluded that Petitioner had persuasively demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of showing that claims 6 and 33 of the ’565 patent, which relates to rearview vision systems for vehicles that provide the vehicle operator with scenic information in the direction rearward of the vehicle, are unpatentable. Thus, the Board instituted trial with respect to these claims. The Board was not similarly persuaded as to challenged claims 14, 21-24, 34-38, 43-46, and 49, and therefore did not institute trial with respect to these challenged claims. Continue reading