`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ERICSSON, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00108
`Patent 6,400,376
`____________
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Board authorized Petitioner to file an unopposed motion to dismiss the
`
`Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition
`Case: IPR2016-00108
`
`
`Petition in this and other identified IPR cases on December 28, 2015. Previously,
`
`Petitioner met and conferred with Patent Owner, and Patent Owner does not
`
`oppose this Motion to Dismiss or otherwise object to Petitioner moving to dismiss
`
`the Petition and terminate the above-captioned IPR. Further, all parties agree that
`
`Patent Owner will not be prejudiced by the dismissal and that the dismissal will
`
`“secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution” to the above-captioned IPR.
`
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). Petitioner hereby moves for dismissal of the pending
`
`Petition and termination of the above-captioned IPR.
`
`I.
`
`Good Cause Exists To Dismiss The Petition And Terminate The Above-
`Captioned IPR
`
`Not only is this Motion to Dismiss unopposed, but there are a number of
`
`other factors that weigh in favor of dismissing the pending Petition. First, the
`
`above-captioned IPR is in its preliminary phase, no preliminary response was filed,
`
`and the Board has yet to reach the merits and issue a decision on institution. In
`
`similar circumstances involving IPRs in such an early juncture, the Board has
`
`previously granted motions to dismiss using its authority under at least 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.5(a) and 42.71(a). See, e.g., Celltrion, Inc. v. Cenetech, Inc., IPR2015-
`
`01733, Paper 12, (PTAB. October 6, 2015) (granting unopposed motion to dismiss
`
`petition); Under Armour, Inc. v. Adidas AG, IPR2015-01531, Paper 8, (PTAB
`
`September 21, 2015) (granting unopposed motion to dismiss petition); Samsung
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition
`Case: IPR2016-00108
`
`
`
`Electronics Co. LTD v. Nvidia Corporation, IPR2015-01270, Paper 11 (PTAB
`
`December 9, 2015) (dismissing Petition even over the patent owner’s objection).
`
`Second, dismissal of the Petition in the above-captioned IPR will preserve
`
`the Board’s resources and the parties’ resources while also epitomizing the Patent
`
`Office’s policy of “secur[ing] the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution” to the
`
`above-captioned IPR. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). Here, the requested dismissal
`
`would relieve the Board of the substantial time and resources required to consider
`
`the merits, issue an institution decision, and proceed through trial (if instituted).
`
`Likewise, even if Petitioner abandons the above-captioned IPR (regardless of
`
`whether this Motion to Dismiss is granted), granting this Motion to Dismiss would
`
`relieve the Patent Owner of the substantial expense in preparing responses,
`
`presenting expert testimony, and participating in an oral hearing. As such, it would
`
`be entirely proper for the Board to dismiss the pending Petition “at this early
`
`juncture[] to promote efficiency and minimize unnecessary costs.” Samsung,
`
`IPR2015-01270, Paper 11 at p. 4.
`
`Lastly, dismissal of the Petition and termination of the above-captioned IPR
`
`is a just and fair resolution. Again, all parties here agree that Patent Owner will
`
`not be prejudiced by the dismissal. Moreover, the parties and the Board will
`
`benefit from preserving of the resources that would otherwise be expended if this
`
`Motion is denied.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition
`Case: IPR2016-00108
`
`
`
`II. Conclusion
`For at least these reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`grant Petitioner’s unopposed motion to dismiss the pending Petition and terminate
`
`the above-captioned IPR.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
` /Michael T. Hawkins/
`Michael T. Hawkins, Reg. No. 57,867, for
`Petitioner, Apple Inc.
`
`
`
` `
`
`
`
`Date: December 29, 2015
`
`
`
`Customer Number 26171
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition
`Case: IPR2016-00108
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.6(e)(1), the undersigned certifies that on December
`
`29, 2015, a complete and entire copy of the Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to
`
`Dismiss Petition was provided via email, to Patent Owner by serving the email
`
`correspondence address of record as follows:
`
`Chad C. Walters
`Douglas M. Kubehl
`Harrison G. Rich
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`2001 Ross Ave., Suite 600
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Email: chad.walters@bakerbotts.com
`Email: doug.kubehl@bakerbotts.com
`Email: harrison.rich@bakerbotts.com
`Email: tracy.perez@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Edward G. Faeth/
`Edward G. Faeth
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`3200 RBC Plaza
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(202) 626-6420
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
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
