Order Regarding Page Limit Violations IPR2014-00041; IPR2014-00043; IPR2014-00051; IPR2014-00054; IPR2014-00055


Takeaway: The Board required parties to refile briefs and replies that did not meet the page limit requirement, even where the additional pages were found in an appendix added to the brief.

In its Order, the Board summarized the results of a conference call held on September 3, 2014. The Board previously authorized the parties to file briefing regarding whether Petitioner identified all real-parties-in-interest and what relief should be granted if Petitioner did not. Each party’s brief was limited to 15 pages. Patent Owner pointed out that that Petitioner had included Appendix A attached to Petitioner’s 15-page brief, and that the Appendix included Petitioner’s responses to Patent Owner’s Statement of Facts. The Board agreed and authorized Petitioner to refile its brief by the close of business September 4, to comply with the 15 page limit.

Patent Owner also argued that a statement in the brief was inconsistent with another statement in another exhibit. The Board did not agree that there was any inconsistent statement.

Petitioner pointed out that Patent Owner’s Replies in Support of its Motions to Amend in two of the proceedings exceeded the 5 page limit. The Board authorized Patent Owner to refile those Replies by September 5 to comply with the 5 page limit.

GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc., IPR2014-00041, IPR2014-00043, IPR2014-00051, IPR2014-00054, IPR2014-00055
Papers 81, 75, 74, 79, 67: Order
Dated: September 5, 2014
Patents 6,945,013 B2; 6,475,435 B1; 6,209,591 B1; 6,481,468 B1; 6,536,188 B1
Before: Rama G. Elluru, Beverly M. Bunting, and Carl D. DeFranco
Written by: Elluru