`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. and
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`Patent 7,856,649
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDING
`
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s Order dated February 23, 2017, this Joint Motion To
`
`Terminate the Proceeding is being resubmitted with an unredacted copy of the
`
`settlement agreement, letter agreement, and term sheet between the parties as
`
`exhibits hereto. As explained further in this motion, and in the concurrently filed
`
`Joint Request To Treat Settlement Documents As Business Confidential
`
`Information, the parties respectfully request the Board to keep the settlement
`
`agreement, letter agreement, and term sheet as business confidential information
`
`and separate from the files of the involved patents under 37 CFR § 42.74(c).
`
`The Board previously authorized the filing of a joint motion to terminate this
`
`and other identified IPR cases on February 8, 2017. Previously, Petitioner met and
`
`conferred with Patent Owner, and Patent Owner does not oppose this Motion to
`
`Terminate or otherwise object to Petitioner moving to dismiss the Petition and
`
`terminate the above-captioned IPR. In fact, Patent Owner joins this motion.
`
`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 and Patent Owner
`
`hereby move for dismissal of the pending Petition and termination of the above-
`
`captioned IPR.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`I. Good Cause Exists To Dismiss The Petition And Terminate The Above-
`Captioned IPR
`Not only is this Motion to Terminate unopposed, but there are a number of
`
`other factors that weigh in favor of dismissing the pending Petition and terminating
`
`this IPR proceeding. First, the above-captioned IPR is in its preliminary phase, no
`
`preliminary response has been 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., Apple Inc. v.
`
`Ericsson Inc., IPR2015-01905, Paper 7, (PTAB January 29, 2016) (granting
`
`unopposed motion to dismiss for twelve IPR petitions); 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 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
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`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 resources that would otherwise be expended if this Motion
`
`is denied.
`
`II. Identification of Parties
`
`This IPR petition is related to a lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Texas
`
`(Personalized Media Communications, LLC. v. Samsung Electronics America,
`
`Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-01754). On February 2, 2017, the parties
`
`filed a Stipulation of Dismissal of the lawsuit and the Court dismissed the action
`
`on February 3, 2017. All parties involved in the ligation are as follows:
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., and
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,856,649 was also asserted in Personalized Media
`
`Communications, LLC v. Top Victory Electronics (Taiwan) Co. Ltd. et al., C.A.
`
`No. 2:15-cv-1206 (E.D. Tex.), which has been terminated, and Personalized Media
`
`Communications, LLC v. Funai Electric Co., Ltd. et al., C.A. No. 2:16-cv-105
`
`(E.D. Tex.), which is pending.
`
`III.
`
`Identification and Status of Related Proceedings Before the USPTO
`
`The following IPR petitions are related to the current IPR petition and/or the
`
`related litigation:
`
`Case IPR2017-00288, Patent 7,747,217
`
`Case IPR2017-00289, Patent 7,752,649
`
`Case IPR2017-00290, Patent 7,752,649
`
`Case IPR2017-00291, Patent 7,752,650
`
`Case IPR2017-00292, Patent 7,856,649
`
`Case IPR2017-00293, Patent 8,675,775
`
`Case IPR2017-00294, Patent 8,711,885
`
`Case IPR2017-00295, Patent 8,711,885
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`The current status of each of these IPR petitions is “Pending”. Each is prior
`
`to institution and prior to any patent owner preliminary response. Motions to
`
`dismiss are being filed concurrently with respect to each petition. The parties
`
`agree that neither party would be prejudiced by dismissal of this and the related
`
`IPR petitions.
`
`Other USPTO proceedings involving U.S. Patent No. 7,752,649 include
`
`IPR2017-00141 and IPR-2017-00142 (terminated), and IPR2016-00753 (trial
`
`instituted). Other USPTO proceedings involving U.S. Patent No. 7,752,650
`
`include IPR2017-00143 (terminated).
`
`IV. Request to Keep Separate
`
`Petitioner and Patent Owner are jointly submitting a settlement agreement,
`
`letter agreement, and term sheet herewith, as exhibits, and hereby request that the
`
`settlement agreement, letter agreement, and term sheet be treated as business
`
`confidential information and kept separate from the files. This request is filed in
`
`accordance with 37 CFR § 42.74(c).
`
`V. Conclusion
`
`For at least these reasons, Petitioner and Patent Owner jointly and
`
`respectfully request that the Board grant this motion to dismiss the pending
`
`Petition and terminate the above-captioned IPR.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Thomas A. Rozylowicz/
`
`
`
` Thomas A. Rozylowicz, Reg. No. 50,620
` Fish & Richardson P.C.
`
` /Dmitry Kheyfits/
` Dmitry Kheyfits, Reg. No. 57,244
` Kheyfits P.C.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 2/24/2017
`Date:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`February 23, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00292
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR §§ 42.6(e)(4) and 42.205(b), the undersigned certifies
`
`that on February 24, 2017, a complete and entire copy of this Joint Motion to
`
`Terminate Proceeding was provided via email to the Patent Owner by serving the
`
`correspondence email address of record as follows:
`
`Dmitry Kheyfits
`Andrey Belenky
`Kheyfits P.C
`1140 Avenue of the Americas, 9th Fl.
`New York, New York 10036
`
`Thomas J. Scott, Jr.
`Personalized Media Communications, LLC
`11491 Sunset Hills Road, Suite 340
`Reston, Virginia 20190
`
`
`
`Email: dkheyfits@kheyfits.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Christine Rogers/
`Christine Rogers
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street, Suite 3200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(650) 839-5092
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`