`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Entered: October 27, 2017
`
`571-272-7822
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC. and AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BROADCOM CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00814
`Patent 6,766,389 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMES B. ARPIN, BARBARA A. PARVIS, and
`DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Termination of Trial
`35 U.S.C. § 317, 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72 and 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00814
`Patent 6,766,389 B2
`
`DISCUSSION
`I.
`On August 18, 2017, we instituted inter partes review with respect to
`certain challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,766,389 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the
`’389 patent”). Paper 10, 30. Thus, this review is at a very early stage, and
`we have not yet reached the deadline for filing the Patent Owner Response.
`See Paper 11, 6.
`On October 25, 2017, after receiving our authorization, the parties
`filed a Joint Motion to Terminate this proceeding (Paper 16) pursuant to a
`written agreement, as well as a Joint Request (Paper 17) to have the
`agreement treated as business confidential information under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.74(c). See also 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). The parties also filed a true copy
`of their written agreement. Ex. 1013.1 In the Joint Motion to Terminate, the
`parties represent that they have settled all of their disputes regarding the
`’389 patent, both here and before the U.S. District Court for the Central
`District of California. Paper 16, 2, 4.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under
`this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint
`request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the
`
`
`1 The agreement refers also to IPR2017-00811. In their Joint Motion to
`Terminate in IPR2017-00811, the parties did not file this agreement. Rather,
`the parties filed Exhibit 1010, entitled “Statement of the Parties Regarding
`Joint Request to Terminate,” and a stipulation of dismissal (Ex. 2001),
`which, according to the parties, “represents the only agreements made in
`connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of this proceeding.”
`IPR2017-00811, Paper 14, 4. The parties are advised to file the agreement
`(Ex. 1013) in IPR2017-00811 “For Board and Parties Only,” pursuant to 35
`U.S.C. § 317(b).
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00814
`Patent 6,766,389 B2
`
`merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” Further,
`under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b),
`[a]ny agreement or understanding between the patent owner and
`a petitioner, including any collateral agreements referred to in
`such agreement or understanding, made in connection with, or in
`contemplation of, the termination of an inter partes review under
`this section shall be in writing and a true copy of such agreement
`or understanding shall be filed in the Office before the
`termination.
`
`As the parties have filed their written agreement and jointly requested
`termination, we determine that it is appropriate to terminate this proceeding
`without rendering a final written decision under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) as to the
`patentability of claims 1–3, 7, and 8 of the ’389 patent, which are all the
`claims on which trial has been instituted (Paper 10, 30). See 35 U.S.C.
`§ 317; 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.74.
`
`
`II. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Request that their agreement
`(Ex. 1013) be treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) is GRANTED;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Terminate
`this proceeding is GRANTED, and this proceeding is hereby terminated; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a true copy of the
`agreement (Ex. 1013) in IPR2017-00811 “For Board and Parties Only.”
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00814
`Patent 6,766,389 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Joseph Edell
`FISCH SIGLER LLP
`joe.edell.ipr@fischllp.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jason Angell
`FREITAS ANGELL & WEINBERG LLP
`jangell@fawlaw.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
