`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 15
` Entered: February 9, 2016
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`
`MOTIONPOINT CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TRANSPERFECT GLOBAL, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`_______________
`
`Case CBM2015-00168 (Patent 6,526,426 B1)
`Case CBM2015-00178 (Patent 7,207,005 B2)
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before JEREMY M. PLENZLER, MIRIAM L. QUINN, and
`JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72 and 35 U.S.C. § 327(a)
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00168 (Patent 6,526,426 B1)
`CBM2015-00178 (Patent 7,207,005 B2)
`
`
`On February 5, 2016, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Terminate the
`instant proceedings pursuant to a settlement agreement. CBM2015-00168,
`Paper 13; CBM2015-00178, Paper 11.1 The parties also filed a true copy of
`their written settlement agreement, made in connection with the termination
`of the instant proceedings, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(b) and
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Exhibit 2024. Additionally, the parties submitted
`Joint Requests to Keep Separate, which request that the settlement
`agreement be treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 327(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 14.
`The instant proceedings are in the preliminary stage. The Board has
`not issued a decision determining whether trial will be instituted in
`Petitioner’s requests for covered business method review of U.S. Patent
`Nos. 6,526,426 B1 and 7,207,005 B2. Further, the parties allege that the
`settlement agreement resolves the dispute underlying the instant
`proceedings. Paper 13, 1.
`Upon consideration of the requests before us, we determine that
`terminating the instant proceedings with respect to both Petitioner and Patent
`Owner, at this early juncture, promotes efficiency and minimizes
`unnecessary costs. Based on the facts of this case, it is appropriate to enter
`judgment.2 See 35 U.S.C. § 327(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72.
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the joint motions to terminate CBM2015-00168 and
`
`CBM2015-00178 are granted;
`
`1 The parties filed identical papers in the captioned cases. For ease of
`reference, this order references the papers filed in CBM2015-00168.
`2 A judgment means a final written decision by the Board, or a termination
`of a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00168 (Patent 6,526,426 B1)
`CBM2015-00178 (Patent 7,207,005 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the instant proceedings are hereby
`terminated as to all parties, including Petitioner and Patent Owner; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint requests that the
`settlement agreement be treated as business confidential information, kept
`separate from the patent files, and made available only to Federal
`Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of
`good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 327(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), are
`granted.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00168 (Patent 6,526,426 B1)
`CBM2015-00178 (Patent 7,207,005 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Bryan P. Collins
`Patrick A. Doody
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
`bryan.collins@pillsburylaw.com
`patrick.doody@pillsburylaw.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert Green Sterne
`Jonathan M. Strang
`Michelle K. Holoubek
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`rsterne-PTAB@skgf.com
`jstrang-PTAB@skgf.com
`mholoubek-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4