`571-272-7822 Entered: January 25, 2016
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`RPX CORPORATION, HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA, INC.,
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD., HUAWEI DEVICE CO. LTD.,
`HUAWEI DEVICE (DONGGUAN) CO., LTD., and
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`RED ANVIL, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00003
`Patent No. 5,680,223
`_______________
`
`
`Before TRENTON A. WARD, LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, and
`CHRISTA P. ZADO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZADO, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.05
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00003
`Patent 5,680,223
`
`On January 21, 2016, a conference call was held between counsel for
`the parties before Judges Zado, Ward, and Pettigrew. The parties requested
`authorization to file a joint motion to terminate the proceeding on the basis
`that the parties have reached a settlement agreement.1
`The parties are hereby authorized to file a joint motion to terminate
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The joint motion should include a brief
`description of the status of any district court litigations and any other
`proceedings that involve the patent at issue in this proceeding. This
`description should also explain how the settlement agreement and
`termination of this proceeding would impact each such related proceeding.
`The joint motion should also include a brief explanation of why the parties
`believe that termination of this proceeding is appropriate.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b), any agreement or understanding
`between the parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the
`termination of a proceeding shall be in writing, and a true copy shall be filed
`with the Board. 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). A redacted version of an agreement
`or understanding is not a true copy. The parties may request that settlement
`agreements or understandings be treated as business confidential pursuant to
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), and may designate such materials as “Parties and
`Board Only” when filing them via the Patent Review Processing System
`
`1 Petitioners also requested to substitute back-up counsel, Kristen L.
`Reichenbach, with another registered patent attorney from the same law
`firm. To substitute Ms. Reichenbach, Petitioners must file a Mandatory
`Notice pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 substituting Ms. Reichenbach with
`back-up counsel from the same law firm, and a Power of Attorney pursuant
`to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10 for newly designated back-up counsel. Petitioners must
`also modify the metadata in the Patent Review Processing System (PRPS)
`identifying Petitioners’ counsel.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00003
`Patent 5,680,223
`
`(PRPS). The request pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) should be submitted
`as a separate filing. Attention of the parties is also directed to FAQ G2 on
`the Board’s website page (http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/prps.jsp) for
`instructions on how to file a settlement agreement as confidential.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the parties are authorized to file, within 5 business
`days of this Order, a joint motion to terminate the proceeding with respect to
`both Petitioners and Patent Owner;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion must be accompanied by
`a true copy, labeled as an exhibit, of all settlement agreements and
`understandings under 37 C.F.R § 42.74(b); and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties may file a separate motion
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) requesting that settlement agreements or
`understandings be treated as business confidential information and kept
`separate from the underlying patent file, and designate such materials as
`“Parties and Board Only” when filing them via the Patent Review
`Processing System (PRPS).
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00003
`Patent 5,680,223
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`John D. Vandenberg
`Kristen L. Reichenbach
`KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
`john.vandenberg@klarquist.com
`kristen.reichenbach@klarquist.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Matt Brower
`browerlitigation@gmail.com
`
`Brandon LaPray
`Brandon@thetexaslawoffice.com
`
`4
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
