`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 10
`
`Entered: May 12, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`ARM, LTD.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GODO KAISHA IP BRIDGE 1
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2017-00527
`Patent RE43,729
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before JUSTIN T. ARBES, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and
`MONICA S. ULLAGADDI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ULLAGADDI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Termination of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00527
`Patent RE43,729
`
`
`I. BACKGROUND
`
`ARM, Ltd. (“Petitioner”)1 and Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 (“Patent Owner”)2
`filed a Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317. Paper 8
`(“Motion” or “Mot.”). The parties also filed a true copy of a settlement agreement
`(“Agreement”). Ex. 2004. The parties identified the Agreement as business
`confidential information and requested that the Agreement be kept separate from
`the patent file under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Mot. 1; Paper 9.
`The Board generally expects that a case “will terminate after the filing of a
`settlement agreement, unless the Board has already decided the merits.” Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012); see 37
`C.F.R. § 42.72. Here, the proceeding is still in its early stages as the Board has not
`issued a decision on institution. Petitioner and Patent Owner indicate that,
`pursuant to the Agreement, they have settled their dispute regarding U.S. Patent
`No. RE43,729. Mot. 2. Petitioner and Patent Owner also indicate the parties to the
`district court litigation have filed a stipulated dismissal as to all claims of U.S.
`Patent No. RE43,729, and that the suit has been dismissed. Id. Under these
`circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate to terminate this proceeding.
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. We also determine that it is appropriate to treat the
`Agreement (Ex. 2004) as business confidential information to be kept separate
`from the patent file. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(b).
`
`
`
`1 Petitioner identifies ARM, Ltd. and ARM, Inc. as the real parties in interest.
`Paper 2, 3.
`2 In its Mandatory Notices, Patent Owner identifies itself as the owner of U.S.
`Patent No. RE43,729 and sole real party in interest. Paper 4, 1.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00527
`Patent RE43,729
`
`
`II. ORDER
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is terminated as to all parties;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the request to treat the Agreement (Ex. 2004) as
`business confidential information, kept separate from the patent file of U.S. Patent
`No. RE43,729, and made available only to Federal Government agencies on
`written request, or to any person on a showing of good cause, under 35 U.S.C. §
`317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is granted.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00527
`Patent RE43,729
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Gregory Duffey
`LAW OFFICE OF GREGORY DUFFEY
`duffeyg@duffeyiplaw.com
`
`Kevin Anderson
`WILEY REIN LLP
`kanderson@wileyrein.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Andrew N. Thomases
`Jordan M. Rossen
`James L. Davis, Jr.
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`andrew.thomases@ropesgray.com
`jordan.rossen@ropesgray.com
`james.l.davis@ropesgray.com
`ipbridgearmptabservice@ropesgray.com
`
`J. Steven Baughman
`PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
`sbaughman@paulweiss.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
