Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

2019 Pat. App. LEXIS 1488

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Representative Orders, Decisions and Notices

January 10, 2019, Decided

Case IPR2017-01657, Paper 47; Patent 8,740,631 B2

USPTO Bd of Patent Appeals & Interferences; Patent Trial & Appeal Bd Decs.

Opinion

MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.

FINAL WRITTEN DECISION

35 U.S.C § 318(a)

I. INTRODUCTION

Luxshare Precision Industry Co., Ltd. ("Petitioner") requested inter partes review of claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 8,740,631 B2 ("the '631 patent," Ex. 1001) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311 et seq. Paper 1 ("Pet."). Bing Xu Precision Co., Ltd. ("Patent Owner") filed a Preliminary Response. Paper 12 ("Prelim. Resp."). In a January 12, 2018 Institution Decision, we determined that Petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing only as to claim 1 of the '631 Patent [*2]  as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Wu and Su. Paper 17, ("Inst. Dec."). Accordingly, we instituted an inter partes review on that ground only pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.108. Inst. Dec. 33.

Subsequent to the Supreme Court's decision in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018), we issued an Order, on May 1, 2018, modifying our Institution Decision to institute review of all challenged claims (1-2) on all grounds asserted in the Petition and instructed the parties to confer regarding any need for further briefing and changes to the schedule for trial. Paper 22 ("SAS Order"). Neither party requested additional briefing on the newly added claims.

Patent Owner filed a Patent Owner Response (Paper 21, "PO Resp.") to which Petitioner filed a Reply (Paper 31, "Pet. Reply" ). Patent Owner also requested authorization to file and, receiving authorization, filed a Sur-Reply. Papers 35, 39 (PO Sur-Reply). Both parties requested a hearing for oral argument (Paper 45) and a prehearing conference (Paper 34), and a pre-hearing was held October 4, 2018 and a hearing was held [*3]  on October 9, 2018. See Paper 47 ("Tr.").

Patent Owner also filed a motion to exclude certain exhibits. Paper 41 ("Mot. to Ex."). Petitioner filed an opposition. Paper 43 ("Mot. to Ex. Opp."). Patent Owner also filed a reply. Paper 44 ("Mot. to Ex. Reply" ).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2019 Pat. App. LEXIS 1488 *

LUXSHARE PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD.,; Petitioner,; v.; BING XU PRECISION CO., LTD.,; Patent Owner.

Notice: [*1] 

ROUTINE OPINION. Pursuant to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Standard Operating Procedure 2, the opinion below has been designated a routine opinion.

CORE TERMS

patent, cable, conductor, insulate, flat, solder, adhesive, layer, reply, hole, rear, surface, connector, skill, jacket, electrical, flexible, comprise, extrinsic, terminal, invent, plurality, reproduce, teach, wire, prior art, fasten, unpatentable, recite, embodiment