throbber
Paper 8
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: December 5, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`CAVIUM, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01729
`Patent 8,805,948 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before STEPHEN C. SIU, DANIEL N. FISHMAN, and
`WILLIAM M. FINK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`FISHMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108
`Dismissing Petitioner’s Motion for Joinder
`37 C.F.R. § 42.122(b)
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01729
`Patent 8.805,948 B2
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`Cavium, Inc. (“Petitioner”) requests inter partes review of claims 1, 3,
`6–9, 11, 14–17, 19, 21, and 22 of U.S. Patent No. 8,805,948 B2 (“the ’948
`patent,” Ex. 1001) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 311 et seq. Paper 1 (“Pet.”).
`Alacritech, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) filed a preliminary response. Paper 7
`(“Prelim. Resp.”).
`Concurrently with the Petition, Petitioner filed a Motion for Joinder.
`Paper 3 (“Joinder Motion.”). The Joinder Motion seeks to join this
`proceeding with Intel Corp. v. Alacritech, Case IPR2017-01395 (“the 1395
`IPR”). Joinder Motion 1.
`At the time Petitioner filed its Petition and Joinder Motion, the Board
`had not yet decided whether to institute inter partes review of the ’948
`patent in the 1395 IPR. On November 22, 2017, however, we entered a
`Decision in the 1395 IPR denying the Petitioner as to all challenges. 1395
`IPR, Paper 8 (“1395 Institution Decision” or “Decision”).
`For the reasons that follow, we determine that the Joinder Motion
`should be dismissed as moot and the Petition for inter partes review denied.
`
`II. DISMISSAL OF MOTION FOR JOINDER
`Because the petition in IPR2017-01395 was denied and inter partes
`review was not instituted, Petitioner’s Joinder Motion is dismissed as moot.
`35 U.S.C. § 315(c).
`
`III. DENIAL OF INTER PARTES REVIEW
`Petitioner states that the Petition is “based on the identical grounds
`that form the basis for the pending inter partes review initiated by Intel
`Corporation” in the 1395 IPR. Joinder Motion 1. As Petitioner states,
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01729
`Patent 8.805,948 B2
`
`[t]he Petition asserts only grounds that are awaiting the Board’s
`institution in the Intel [1395] IPR, supported by the same
`technical expert and the same testimony. There are no new
`arguments for the Board to consider. Likewise, the Petition relies
`on the same exhibits.
`Id. at 4.
`As noted above, on November 22, 2017, we denied institution of inter
`partes review on the grounds of obviousness over Thia, Tanenbaum96, and
`Stevens2. 1395 Institution Decision 8. In our Decision, we determined that,
`“because the record does not support Stevens2 as a publicly accessible
`printed publication, we find that Petitioner has not established a reasonable
`likelihood of prevailing on its sole ground of unpatentability with respect to
`claims 1, 3, 6–9, 11, 14–17, 19, 21, and 22.” Id. at 8. Here, Petitioner
`presents grounds and arguments in support of the public availability of
`Stevens21 identical to those we found insufficient in our previous Decision.
`Compare Pet. 38 n.6; Ex. 1063 (“Stansbury Declaration”) with 1395
`Institution Decision 5–6. Accordingly, for the reasons discussed in our
`Decision in IPR2017-01395 (id. at 4–8), we deny the Petition in this
`proceeding.
`
`IV. ORDER
`
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the Motion for Joinder is dismissed as moot; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition is denied and no inter partes
`review is instituted.
`
`
`1 W. Richard Stevens et al., TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 2, 1995 (“Stevens2,”
`Ex. 1013).
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2017-01729
`Patent 8.805,948 B2
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`Patrick McPherson
`pdmcpherson@duanemorris.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jim Glass
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Jospeh Paunovich
`joepaunovich@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Brian Mack
`brianmack@quinnemanuel.com
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket