`Tel: 571.272.7822
`
`Paper 10
`Entered: May 19, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`BLACKBERRY CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`OPTUS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC, and
`OPTUS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC
`Patent Owners.
`
`Case IPR2017-00749 (Patent 8,064,919)
`Case IPR2017-00751 (Patent 8,199,792)
`Case IPR2017-00754 (Patent 8,019,332)
`Case IPR2017-00755 (Patent 8,174,506) 1
`_________________________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, MIRIAM QUINN, and
`JOHN P. PINKERTON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PINKERTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Joint Motions to Terminate Pursuant to Settlement
`35 U.S.C. § 317(a) and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72–42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses the same issues in these four inter partes reviews.
`We exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be docketed in each case.
`The parties, however, are not authorized to use this style of filing in
`subsequent papers, without prior authorization.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00749 (Patent 8,064,919)
`Case IPR2017-00751 (Patent 8,199,792)
`Case IPR2017-00754 (Patent 8,019,332)
`Case IPR2017-00755 (Patent 8,174,506)
`
`
`On May 2, 2017, and pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), the parties filed
`a joint motion to terminate in each of the above cited proceedings.
`IPR2017-00749, Paper 7; IPR2017-00751, Paper 6; IPR2017-00754,
`Paper 6; IPR2017-00755, Paper 6. Along with each joint motion, the parties
`filed a Settlement Agreement, involving all parties to the instant
`proceedings. IPR2017-00749, Ex. 1012; IPR2017-0751, Ex. 1010;
`IPR2017-00754, Ex. 1017; IPR2017-00755, Ex. 1018. The parties also filed
`in each case a joint request that the settlement agreement be treated as
`business confidential information pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37
`C.F.R. § 42.74(c). IPR2017-00749, Paper 8; IPR2017-00751, Paper 7;
`IPR2017-00754, Paper 7; IPR2017-00755, Paper 7. We authorized the
`above filings on Apr. 28, 2017.
`The parties represent that they have settled their disputes and
`memorialized their settlement in the written agreement submitted in each
`case. See, e.g., IPR2017-00749, Paper 7, 2–3. In the joint motions, the
`parties also represent that the settlement agreement resolves their disputes
`regarding the patents in the inter partes reviews and the related lawsuits. Id.
`These matters are at a stage prior to institution, with no decision on
`the merits having been made. Upon consideration of the facts before us, we
`determine that it is appropriate to terminate the proceedings with respect to
`all parties. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.74. Therefore,
`the joint motions to terminate these proceedings are granted. This paper
`does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00749 (Patent 8,064,919)
`Case IPR2017-00751 (Patent 8,199,792)
`Case IPR2017-00754 (Patent 8,019,332)
`Case IPR2017-00755 (Patent 8,174,506)
`
`
`ORDER
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`ORDERED that the parties’ joint request in each proceeding that the
`settlement agreement (IPR2017-00749, Ex. 1012; IPR2017-0751, Ex. 1010;
`IPR2017-00754, Ex. 1017; IPR2017-00755, Ex. 1018) be treated as business
`confidential information and be kept separate from the patent file is granted;
`and,
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate in each of
`the IPR2017-00749, IPR2017-00751, IPR2017-00754, and IPR2017-00755
`proceedings is granted and each of the proceedings is terminated with
`respect to both Petitioner and Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00749 (Patent 8,064,919)
`Case IPR2017-00751 (Patent 8,199,792)
`Case IPR2017-00754 (Patent 8,019,332)
`Case IPR2017-00755 (Patent 8,174,506)
`
`PETITIONER:
`Robert Mattson (Lead Counsel)
`Sammer Gokhale (Back-up Counsel)
`Thomas C. Yebernetsky (Back-up Counsel)
`OBLON LLP
`cpdocketmattson@oblon.com
`cpdocketgokhale@oblon.com
`cpdocketyebernetsky@oblon.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Barry Bumgardner (Lead Counsel)
`Brent Bumgardner (Back-Up Counsel)
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`barry@nelbum.com
`brent@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
