`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ALLURE ENERGY, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-01475
`Patent 8,174,381
`____________
`
`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDING UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), the Petitioner, Honeywell International Inc.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and Patent Owner, Allure Energy, Inc., (collectively, “Parties”) hereby jointly
`
`move for an order terminating the Inter Partes review, subject to the terms of the
`
`Settlement Agreement, dated April 13, 2017, entered into by the Parties.
`
`The IPR Proceeding relates to a petition for Inter Partes Review filed July
`
`21, 2016, directed to U.S. Patent No. 8,174,381 (the “’381 Patent”), and assigned
`
`Proceeding Number IPR2016-01475. The PTAB instituted trial on February 3,
`
`2017. (Paper No. 6.)
`
`The Parties have settled their dispute, and have reached agreement to
`
`terminate this IPR Proceeding. The Parties’ Settlement Agreement has been made
`
`in writing, and a copy of same is being filed concurrently herewith as an Exhibit.
`
`There are no other agreements relating to the proceeding.
`
`In addition, the Parties desire that the Settlement Agreement be maintained
`
`as business confidential information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), and a separate
`
`joint request to that effect is being filed concurrently herewith.
`
`As stated in 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), because Petitioner and Patent Owner jointly
`
`request this termination, no estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) shall attach to
`
`Petitioner.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`1. Reasons Why Termination Is Appropriate.
`
`Termination is proper under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) because the Parties are
`
`jointly requesting termination and the Office has not yet “decided the merits of the
`
`proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” Patent Owner’s Response
`
`to the Petition and Institution Decision has not yet been filed, and is not due until
`
`May 22, 2017, under the current Scheduling Order, as modified by a joint
`
`stipulation by the parties. (Paper Nos. 7 and 8.)
`
`As noted in the Patent Office Trial Practice Guidelines, “there are strong
`
`public policy reasons to favor settlement between the parties to a 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. 35
`
`U.S.C. 317(a), as amended, and 35 U.S.C. 327.”1 Accordingly, termination is
`
`appropriate here.
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Status of Related District Court Litigation.
`
`There is no underlying litigation involving the ‘381 Patent. However, there
`
`is litigation between Petitioner and Patent Owner that is addressed by the
`
`Settlement Agreement that involves related patents U.S. 8,626,344 and U.S.
`
`8,497,797. That litigation is styled Allure Energy, Inc. v. Honeywell Int’l Inc.,
`
`1 See Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 157 at 48768.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case Number 1:15-cv-00079-RP, W.D. Texas and has settled. No other parties are
`
`involved in the litigation.
`
`3.
`
`Related IPR Proceedings
`
`The Parties are also involved in the following IPR proceedings, and pursuant
`
`to the Settlement Agreement, have already submitted a joint motion to terminate
`
`IPR2016-01093 and shall submit a joint motion to terminate IPR 2016-01605 as
`
`well:
`
`Case No.
`
`Filing Date
`
`Subject Patent
`
`IPR2016-01093
`
`May 24, 2016
`
`IPR2016-01605
`
`August 12, 2016
`
`US 8,509,954
`
`US 8,498,749
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the Parties jointly request termination of IPR No.
`
`IPR2016-01475.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Bruce J. Rose/
`Bruce J. Rose, Reg. No. 37,431, for
`Petitioner, Honeywell International Inc.
`
`/John S. Artz/
`John S. Artz, Reg. No. 36,431, for
`Patent Owner, Allure Energy, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 3, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 3, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`ALLURE ENERGY, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-01475
`Patent 8,174,381
`____________
`
`
`
`JOINT REQUEST TO FILE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS BUSINESS
`CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), Petitioner,
`
`
`
`Honeywell International Inc., and Patent Owner, Allure Energy, Inc., (collectively,
`
`“Parties”) jointly request to file the Settlement Agreement, including the entirety of
`
`the Exhibit to the Joint Motion To Terminate Proceeding, as business confidential
`
`information, which shall be kept separate from the file of the involved patents.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Bruce J. Rose/
`Bruce J. Rose, Reg. No. 37,431, for
`Petitioner, Honeywell International Inc.
`
`/John S. Artz/
`John S. Artz, Reg. No. 36,431, for
`Patent Owner, Allure Energy, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 3, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 3, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.6(e)(1), the undersigned certifies that on May 3,
`
`2017, a complete and entire copy of:
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDING UNDER
`35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`JOINT REQUEST TO FILE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS BUSINESS
`CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`were provided via email, to Petitioner by serving the email correspondence address
`
`of record as follows:
`
`Bruce J. Rose
`Alston & Bird LLP
`101 S. Tryon, Ste 4000
`Charlotte, NC 28280
`
`Email: bruce.rose@alston.com, ben.pleune@alston.com,
`christopher.douglas@alston.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BLOOMFIELD 39285-214 1824379v1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/John S. Artz/
`John S. Artz
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`