`571-272-7822
` Date Entered: November 29, 2021
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFIC
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUICATIONS, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ROVI GUIDES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`IPR2017-00950 (Patent 8,006,263 B2)
`IPR2017-00951 (Patent 8,006,263 B2)
`IPR2017-00952 (Patent 8,006,263 B2)
`IPR2017-01048 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`IPR2017-01049 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
` IPR2017-01050 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, MICHAEL R. ZECHER, and
`JESSICA C. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PER CURIAM.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses an issue that is identical in all six proceedings.
`We, therefore, exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00950 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01048 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`IPR2017-00951 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01049 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`IPR2017-00952 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01050 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`
`
`
`On October 1, 2021, Patent Owner, Rovi Guides, Inc. (“Rovi”), filed a
`Request for Rehearing by the Director in each proceeding. See, e.g.,
`IPR2017-00950, Paper 47. Prior to filing those requests, via email Rovi
`requested authorization to file a motion to terminate, vacate, and keep the
`Settlement Agreement confidential. See, e.g., IPR2017-00950, Ex. 3001.
`On November 22, 2021, an Order Denying Rovi’s Request for Rehearing by
`the Director (“Order on the Director Rehearing Request”) was entered in
`each proceeding. See, e.g., IPR2017-00950, Paper 49.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[i]f no petitioner remains in the inter
`partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final
`written decision under section 318(a).” The Board already has proceeded to
`a final written decision in each of these six cases. The Order on the Director
`Rehearing Request entered in each proceeding states that the Patent Trial
`and Appeal Board’s Final Written Decision is the final decision of the
`agency. See, e.g., IPR2017-00950, Paper 49, 2. Therefore, under the plain
`language of the statute, a motion to terminate is not available under § 317(a).
`The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued orders in the
`appeals of each proceeding, remanding the cases to the Office “for the
`limited purpose of allowing the parties to seek further action by the
`Director.” See, e.g., Rovi Guides, Inc. v. Hirshfeld, No. 2020-2111, ECF
`No. 50, at 2 (Aug. 3, 2021). The Federal Circuit’s limited remand order did
`not vacate the Board’s Final Written Decisions. The Order on the Director
`Rehearing Request also did not vacate the Board’s Final Written Decisions.
`Under these circumstances, Rovi’s request for authorization to file a motion
`to vacate in each proceeding is denied.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00950 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01048 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`IPR2017-00951 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01049 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`IPR2017-00952 (Patent 8,006,263 B2) IPR2017-01050 (Patent 8,578,413 B2)
`
`
`
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Rovi’s request for authorization to file a motion to
`
`terminate, vacate, and keep the Settlement Agreement confidential in each
`proceeding is denied.
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Frederic M. Meeker
`Bradley C. Wright
`Scott M. Kelly
`Azuka C. Dike
`Joshua Davenport
`Camille Sauer
`Jared Radkiewicz
`BANNER AND WITCOFF, LTD.
`fmeeker@bannerwitcoff.com
`bwright@bannerwitcoff.com
`skelly@bannerwitcoff.com
`adike@bannerwitcoff.com
`jdavenport@bannerwitcoff.com
`csauer@bannerwitcoff.com
`jradkiewicz@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Mark D. Rowland
`Jason D. Eisenberg
`Kristina Caggiano Kelly
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`Mark.Rowland@ropesgray.com
`jasone-PTAB@sternekessler.com
`kckelly-PTAB@sternekessler.com
`
`3
`
`
`
`
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
