throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`HTC CORPORATION, AND HTC AMERICA, INC.
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`NONEND INVENTIONS, N.V.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`129051591.2
`
`

`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(a)-(b), Petitioners HTC
`
`Corporation and HTC America, Inc. (collectively, “HTC”) and Patent Owner
`
`Nonend Inventions, N.V. (“Nonend”) jointly move to terminate the present inter
`
`partes review proceeding in light of the parties’ resolution of their dispute relating
`
`to U.S. Patent No. 8,099,513 B2 (“the ’513 patent”) and the executed written
`
`agreement regarding the parties’ resolution. (This proceeding has already been
`
`terminated as to petitioner Microsoft Corporation.)
`
`Termination is appropriate in the instant proceeding because the dispute
`
`between HTC and Nonend has been resolved. The IPR petition was accorded a
`
`Nov. 20, 2015 filing date and this proceeding is at a sufficiently early stage.
`
`As required by 35 U.S.C. § 317(b), the parties are filing, concurrently
`
`herewith, a true copy of their executed written agreement as Exhibit 1067. The
`
`parties further request, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), that the agreement be
`
`treated as confidential business information and kept separate from the files of the
`
`involved patent. The parties are filing, concurrently herewith, a motion to treat the
`
`settlement agreement as confidential business information pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §
`
`327(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`
`
`129051591.2
`
`1
`
`

`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`The applicable statute, 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), provides that an inter partes
`
`review proceeding “shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the
`
`joint request of the petitioner and the patent owner, unless the Office has decided
`
`the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” (emphasis
`
`added). Moreover, strong public policy considerations favor settlement between
`
`parties to an inter partes review proceeding. Indeed, the Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide provides:
`
`N. Settlement. There are strong public policy reasons to favor
`settlement between the parties to a proceeding. The Board will be
`available to facilitate settlement discussions, and where appropriate,
`may require a settlement discussion as part of the proceeding. The
`Board expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a
`settlement agreement, unless the Board has already decided the merits
`of the proceeding.
`
`The Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48768 (Aug. 14
`
`2012).
`
`Notably, the IPR petition was filed on Nov. 20, 2015 and thus this
`
`proceeding is at a sufficiently early stage where no motions or actions are
`
`outstanding and the Board has not invested significant resources in this proceeding.
`
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response is due March 9, 2016 and has not been filed
`
`yet. The due date for the Board’s institution decision is June 9, 2016. Therefore,
`
`
`129051591.2
`
`2
`
`

`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`the Office has not decided the merits of the proceeding. No public interest factors
`
`militate against termination of this proceeding.
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), because Petitioner HTC and Patent Owner
`
`Nonend request this termination, no estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) shall attach
`
`as to Petitioner HTC.
`
`Wherefore, HTC and Nonend respectfully request termination of the Inter
`
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,099,513, PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /Matthew J. Antonelli/
`Lead Counsel
`
`Matthew J Antonelli
`Zachariah Harrington
`Kris Yue Teng
`Larry Dean Thompson , Jr
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`Nonend Inventions, N.V.
`
`Dated: February 23, 2016
`
`
`
`Antonelli, Harrington & Thompson LLP
`4306 Yoakum Blvd., Ste. 450
`Houston, TX 77006
`
`
`
`
`129051591.2
`
`3
`
`

`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /Bing Ai/
`Lead Counsel
`Bing Ai, Reg. No. 43,312
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Matthew C. Bernstein, Pro Hac Vice
`Kevin J. Patariu, Reg. No. 63,210
`Christopher L. Kelley, Reg. No. 42,714
`Vinay P. Sathe, Reg. No. 55,595
`Philip A. Morin, Reg. No. 45,926
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner
`HTC
`
`Dated: February 23, 2016
`
`
`
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`(858) 720-5700
`
`
`
`
`129051591.2
`
`4
`
`

`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-00225
`Patent No. 8,099,513 B2
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE (37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e), 42.105(a))
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a true copy of the foregoing JOINT
`
`MOTION TO TERMINATE PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317 AND 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74 and supporting materials have been served in its entirety this 23rd Day of
`
`February 2016 on the following parties via electronic mail:
`
`Bing Ai
`Matthew C. Bernstein
`Kevin J. Patariu
`Christopher L. Kelley
`Vinay P. Sathe
`Philip A. Morin
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`(858) 720-5700
`PerkinsServiceMSFT-Nonend-IPR@perkinscoie.com
`
`
` /Matthew J. Antonelli/
`Reg. No. 45,973
`4306 Yoakum Blvd., Ste. 450
`Houston, TX 77006
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`Nonend Inventions, N.V.
`
`
`
`
`
`129051591.2

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket