`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper: 26
`Entered: September 28, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC., HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`ZTE CORPORATION, AND ZTE (USA), INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-014801
`Patent 8,867,472 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before BRYAN F. MOORE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`JOHN A. HUDALLA, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Joint Motion to Terminate with Respect to Apple Inc.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., ZTE Corporation, and ZTE (USA),
`Inc. filed a petition in (now terminated) IPR2017-00982, and have been
`joined to the instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-014801
`Patent 8,867,472 B2
`
`INTRODUCTION
`On January 31, 2017, we instituted an inter partes review in this
`proceeding. In this proceeding, a final hearing was held on August 30, 2017.
`See Hearing Tr., Paper 23. The Board has not yet issued a Final Written
`Decision. On September 18, 2017, Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Apple”) and
`Patent Owner Cellular Communications Equipment LLC (“CCE”) filed a
`joint motion to terminate this proceeding as to Apple under 35 U.S.C. § 317
`and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74 (Paper 24), a true copy of the written settlement
`agreement (Ex. 1014), and a joint request to maintain confidentiality and to
`keep separate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c)
`(Paper 25).
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under
`this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint
`request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the
`merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The
`grant of the motion to terminate will not result in the termination of the
`instant proceeding, because HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., ZTE
`Corporation, and ZTE (USA), Inc. remain as Petitioners. The parties are
`reminded that the Board is not a party to the settlements, and may identify
`independently any question of patentability. 37 C.F.R § 42.74(a).
`Generally, however, the Board expects that a proceeding will
`terminate as to settling parties after the filing of a settlement agreement.
`See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768
`(Aug. 14, 2012). The Board is persuaded that, under these circumstances, it
`is appropriate to terminate this proceeding only as to Apple. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.72.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-014801
`Patent 8,867,472 B2
`
`
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate this proceeding with
`respect to Apple is GRANTED, and this proceeding is hereby terminated
`only as to Apple; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the written
`settlement agreement (Ex. 1014) be: (i) treated as business confidential
`information; (ii) kept separate from the file of U.S. Patent No. 8,867,472 B2;
`(iii) kept confidential from any third party (including from the non-settling
`Petitioners); and (iv) made available only to Federal Government agencies
`on written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause, under the
`provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is GRANTED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-014801
`Patent 8,867,472 B2
`PETITIONER APPLE INC:
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`Scott T. Jarratt
`Clint S. Wilkins
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`scott.jarratt.ipr@haynesboone.com
`clint.wilkins.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`PETITIONERS HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`ZTE CORPORATION, AND ZTE (USA), INC:
`
`Steven A. Moore
`Brian Nash
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
`steve.moore@pillsburylaw.com
`brian.nash@pillsburylaw.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Matthew C. Juren
`Barry J. Bumgardner
`Donald Puckett
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`matthew@nelbum.com
`barry@nelbum.com
`puckett@nelbum.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
