In its Order, the Board granted Patent Owner’s request for additional briefing regarding the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Alice Corp. Ptt. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (June 19, 2014).  Patent Owner requested five additional pages to respond to Petitioner’s Reply Brief in order to address any issues arising fromAlice.  Petitioner opposed the request contending that the briefing was unnecessary as it did not change any pre-existing law.  The Board found that based on the facts of this proceeding, a sur-reply of five pages limited to discussing the impact of Alice was warranted, and also authorized Petitioner to file a sur-sur-reply of two pages limited to the scope of Patent Owner’s sur-reply.

SAP America, Inc. v. Versata Development Group, Inc., CBM2013-00042
Paper 33: Order on Conduct of the Proceeding
Dated: July 11, 2014
Patent 5,878,400
Before: Michael P. Tierney and Trevor M. Jefferson
Written by: Tierney