`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 15
`Entered: June 7, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`TCT MOBILE, INC. AND TCT MOBILE (US) INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`WIRELESS PROTOCOL INNOVATIONS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2016-01492
`Patent 6,381,211 C1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, and
`KAMRAN JIVANI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WEATHERLY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`JUDGMENT
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`On February 13, 2017, we instituted this inter partes review of claims
`11, 13–15, 19–24, and 26–28 of U.S. Patent No. 6,381,211 C1 (“the
`’211 patent”). Paper 7, 14. Our Decision on Rehearing did not alter which
`claims were subject to inter partes review. Paper 13, 10. On May 4, 2017,
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01492
`Patent 6,381,211 C1
`
`with our authorization,1 Patent Owner filed a motion for adverse judgment
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Paper 14 (“the Motion” or “Mot.”). Patent
`Owner indicated that Petitioner does not oppose the Motion. Mot. 1. Patent
`Owner “requests judgment against itself, and asks that the Board cancel . . .
`claims 11, 13–15, 19–24, and 26–28 of the ’211 Patent.” Id. Therefore,
`Patent Owner seeks cancellation of all claims pending in this proceeding.
`Upon consideration of Patent Owner’s unopposed Motion, we
`conclude that judgment against Patent Owner is warranted on all claims
`before us in this proceeding. Accordingly, we grant the Motion and enter
`this judgment pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(3),2 which constitutes a final
`written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) to cancel claims 11, 13–15,
`19–24, and 26–28 of the ’211 patent.
`For the reasons stated above, it is:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner Wireless Protocol Innovations, Inc.’s
`Motion for Adverse Judgment Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that claims 11, 13–15, 19–24, and 26–28 of
`U.S. Patent No. 6,381,211 C1 are unpatentable and shall be canceled; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that because this is a final written decision
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a), any party to this proceeding seeking judicial
`
`
`1 The Board authorized the motion for adverse judgment in an e-mail dated
`May 3, 2017.
`2 Patent Owner specifically identifies 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2) as the basis for
`its request for adverse judgment. Mot. 1. Because that subsection of Rule
`42.73(b) addresses “cancellation or disclaimer” of claims, neither of which
`has yet occurred, we interpret the Motion as a concession of unpatentability
`of the claims at issue as set forth in Rule 42.73(b)(3).
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01492
`Patent 6,381,211 C1
`
`review of our Decision must comply with the notice and service
`requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 90.2.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01492
`Patent 6,381,211 C1
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`John D. Zele
`Alex Hanna
`Jacob A. Snodgrass
`Bradford A. Cangro
`Leeger Yu
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`
`
`john.zele@morganlewis.com
`alex.hanna@morganlewis.com
`jacob.snodgrass@morganlewis.com
`bradford.cangro@morganlewis.com
`leeger.yu@morganlewis.com
`TCT-WPI-IPRs@morganlewis.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Ryan W. O’Donnell
`Robert D. Leonard
`Andrew Buschmeier
`VOLPE & KOENIG, P.C.
`
`
`rodonnell@vklaw.com
`rleonard@vklaw.com
`abuschmeier@vklaw.com
`patents@vklaw.com
`
`4
`
`