`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 9
`Entered: July 13, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC. and INSTAGRAM, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SKKY LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00641
`Patent 9,203,956 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before KARL D. EASTHOM, WILLIAM V. SAINDON, and
`CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PAULRAJ, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00641
`Patent 9,203,956 B2
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Facebook, Inc. and Instagram, LLC (collectively, “Petitioner”) filed a
`Petition (Paper 2, “Pet.”), requesting institution of an inter partes review of
`claims 1–3 of U.S. Patent No. 9,203,956 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the ’956 patent”).
`Skky LLC. (“Patent Owner”) timely filed a Preliminary Response (Paper 6,
`“Prelim. Resp.”). With its Preliminary Response, Patent Owner provided
`evidence that it filed with the Office a statutory disclaimer of claims 1–7 of
`the ’956 patent pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(a). Ex. 2001.
`We have statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a). In view of
`Patent Owner’s disclaimer of all the challenged claims, we deny institution
`of an inter partes review of the ’956 patent.
`II. DISCUSSION
`
`In its Preliminary Response, Patent Owner contends that “[b]ecause
`each claim petitioned for review is now disclaimed, the Petition is now
`moot.” Prelim. Resp. 1.
`A patentee may “make disclaimer of any complete claim . . . . Such
`disclaimer shall be in writing, and recorded in the Patent and Trademark
`Office; and it shall thereafter be considered as part of the original patent.”
`35 U.S.C. § 253(a). When a patent owner files a statutory disclaimer with
`its preliminary response, “[n]o inter partes review will be instituted based on
`disclaimed claims.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.107(e).
`As we previously indicated with respect to our denial of institution of
`a covered business method patent review in CBM2017-00007, which
`concerned the same patent, we have confirmed that Patent Owner has
`complied with the requirements for a statutory disclaimer of claims 1–7 of
`the ’956 patent. See Facebook, Inc. v. Skky, LLC, Case CBM2017-00007,
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00641
`Patent 9,203,956 B2
`
`Decision Denying Institution of Covered Business Method Patent Review
`(PTAB Apr. 10, 2017) (Paper 9), slip op. at 2–3. Accordingly, for the same
`reason, we decline to institute an inter partes review based on the current
`Petition.
`III. ORDER
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby
`ORDERED that pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), an inter partes
`review is not instituted as to any claim of the ’956 patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00641
`Patent 9,203,956 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`Heidi L. Keefe
`Andrew C. Mace
`COOLEY LLP
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`amace@cooley.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Ryan M. Schultz
`Andrew J. Kabat
`ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
`rschultz@robinskaplan.com
`akabat@robinskaplan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`