`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 11
`Entered: Oct. 1, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`NIKE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MAYFONK ATHLETIC, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00655 & Case IPR2015-00656
`(Patent 8,860,584 B1)1
`____________
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KARL D. EASTHOM,
`and JASON J. CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`EASTHOM, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of the Proceeding
`35 U.S.C. § 317
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.73, 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Judgment is entered in each identified case.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00655 & IPR2015-00656
`Patent 8,860,584 B1
`
`The parties filed a joint motion in each case to terminate each
`proceeding (“Motion”) and a true copy of their written settlement agreement
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). Paper 10;
`Ex. 1014. The Motion states that “the parties have settled their dispute as
`to” U.S. Patent No. 8,860,584. Paper 10, 2. The Board does not have before
`it full briefing on the trial issues, and has not entered a final decision.
`Accordingly, it is appropriate to enter judgment terminating this proceeding,
`without rendering a final written decision. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.2; 42.72;
`42.73(a).2
`It is
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2015-00655 and
`IPR2015-00656 is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the proceeding is terminated.
`PETITIONER:
`Edward H. Sikorski
`James M. Heintz
`DLA Piper LLC (US)
`Nike-Mayfonk-IPR@dlapiper.com
`Nike-Mayfonk-IPR@dlapiper.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Edward J. Benz
`Naveen Modi
`Paul Hastings LLP
`joebenz@paulhastings.com
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`
`2 A judgment “means a final written decision by the Board, or a termination
`of a proceeding.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
`
`
`2