`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`BROADCOM LTD.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TESSERA, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`Patent No. 6,573,609
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PURSUANT TO
`35 U.S.C. § 317 AND 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72 AND 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72 and 42.74 and the
`
`Board’s authorization of December 20, 2017, Petitioner Broadcom Ltd.
`
`(“Broadcom”) and Patent Owner Tessera, Inc. (“Tessera”) jointly move to terminate
`
`the present inter partes review proceeding in light of the parties’ settlement of their
`
`dispute insofar as it relates to U.S. Patent No. 6,573,609 (“the ’609 patent”). The
`
`parties are filing, concurrently herewith, true copies of their written Settlement
`
`Agreement (Confidential Exhibit 2001), License Agreement (Confidential Exhibit
`
`2002) , and collateral agreements (Confidential Exhibits 2003-2006) (collectively,
`
`the “Agreements”) in connection with this matter as required by the statute. The
`
`Agreements completely resolve all controversies between the Patent Owner and
`
`Petitoner, including their dispute relating to the ’609 patent by resolving each of the
`
`following actions:
`
`a)
`
`b)
`
`c)
`
`d)
`
`e)
`
`Certain Semiconductor Devices, Semiconductor Device Packages, and
`Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337–TA–1010 (U.S. Int’l Trade
`Comm’n);
`
`Certain Wireless Audio Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. No.
`337-TA-1071 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n);
`
`Tessera, Inc., et al. v. Broadcom Corp., Civil Action No. 16-cv-00379
`(D. Del.);
`
`Tessera, Inc., et al. v. Broadcom Corp., Civil Action No. 16-cv-00380
`(D. Del.)
`
`Invensas Corp. v. Avago Technologies U.S. Inc., et al., Civil Action
`No. 16-cv-1033 (D. Del.);
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`Tessera Inc., et al. v. Avago Technologies U.S. Inc., et al., Civil Action
`No. 16-cv-1034 (D. Del);
`
`Broadcom Ltd., et al. v. DTS,
`2:17-cv-05935-AB-JEM (C.D. Cal.);
`
`Inc., et al., Case No.
`
`Invensas Corp. v. Mouser Electronics Inc., et al., Case No. 7 O 97/16
`(District Court Mannheim, Germany) / 6 U 46/17 (Appellate Court
`Karlsruhe, Germany),
`including all corresponding enforcement
`proceedings;
`
`Invensas Corp. v. Broadcom Ltd., et al., Case No. 7 O 98/16 (District
`Court Mannheim, Germany) / 6 U 34/17 (Appellate Court Karlsruhe,
`Germany), including all corresponding enforcement proceedings;
`
`Avago Technologies GmbH v. Invensas Corp., Case No. 2 Ni 43/16
`(EP) (Federal Patent Court, Germany);
`
`Invensas Corp. v. Broadcom Ltd., et al., Case No. C/09/517267
`(District Court of The Hague, Netherlands); and
`
`IPR2017-00170, -00171, -00736, -01470, -01486, -01645, -01646,
`-01649, -02201; and
`
`IPR2018-00021, -00135, -00172.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`f)
`
`g)
`
`h)
`
`i)
`
`j)
`
`k)
`
`l)
`
`m)
`
`
`The parties further jointly certify that there are no other agreements or
`
`understandings, oral or written, between Tessera and Broadcom, including any
`
`collateral agreements, made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the
`
`termination of the present proceeding as set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 317(b).
`
`The parties request that the Agreements (Confidential Exhibits 2001-2006) be
`
`treated as business confidential information and kept separate from the file of the
`
`’609 patent. This confidentiality request extends to the title of the Agreements,
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`which are therefore identified as “Agreement 1,” “Agreement 2,” “Agreement 3,”
`
`“Agreement 4,” “Agreement 5,” and “Agreement 6” on Patent Owner’s Updated
`
`Exhibit List, filed herewith. A joint request to treat the Agreements as business
`
`confidential information kept separate from the file of the involved patent pursuant
`
`to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) is being filed concurrently herewith.
`
`Termination with Respect to Inter Partes Review Proceeding
`
`A joint motion to terminate generally “must (1) include a brief explanation as
`
`to why termination is appropriate; (2) identify all parties in any related litigation
`
`involving the patents at issue; (3) identify any related proceedings currently before
`
`the Office, and (4) discuss specifically the current status of each such related
`
`litigation or proceeding with respect to each party to the litigation or proceeding.”
`
`Heartland Tanning, Inc. v. Sunless, Inc., IPR2014-00018, Paper No. 26, at *2
`
`(P.T.A.B. July 28, 2014). Each element is addressed below:
`
`As for requirement (1), termination is appropriate in this proceeding because
`
`the parties have settled their dispute with respect to the ’609 patent, and have agreed
`
`to terminate this inter partes review. The applicable statute, 35 U.S.C. § 317(a),
`
`provides that an inter partes review proceeding “shall be terminated with respect to
`
`any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and the patent owner, unless
`
`the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for
`
`termination is filed.” In this case, the Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response to the
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`petition has not yet been filed, and the Office has not instituted the petition and has
`
`made no decision on the merits. Moreover, as recognized by the rules of practice
`
`before the Board:
`
`There are strong public policy reasons to favor settlement between the
`parties to a proceeding. The Board will be available to facilitate
`settlement discussions, and where appropriate, may require a
`settlement discussion as part of the proceeding. The Board expects that
`a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement,
`unless the Board has already decided the merits of the proceeding.
`Patent Office Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48768 (Aug. 14, 2012)
`
`(emphasis added). Moreover, no public interest or other factors militate against
`
`termination of this proceeding.
`
`As for requirement (2), as discussed above, the only parties to any related
`
`litigations involving the ‘609 patent are Patent Owner Tessera, Inc.; Petitioner
`
`Broadcom Limited; and Invensas Corporation, Avago Technologies U.S. Inc. and
`
`Avago Technologies Wireless (U.S.A.) Manufacturing Inc. Avago Technologies
`
`U.S. Inc. and Avago Technologies Wireless (U.S.A.) Manufacturing Inc. are both
`
`subsidiaries of Broadcom Limited. Tessera, Inc. and Invensas Corporation are both
`
`subsidiaries of Xperi Corporation. Those litigations are now terminated or in the
`
`process of termination.
`
`As for requirement (3), there are no related Inter Partes Review proceedings
`
`for the ’609 patent currently before the Patent Office. The parties are also
`
`4
`
`
`
`concurrently moving to terminate the following related proceedings before the
`
`Patent Office:
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`Patent No.
`6,043,699
`6,278,653
`7,809,393
`6,856,007
`6,954,001
`6,046,076
`6,218,215
`6,080,605
`6,408,121
`6,972,480
`6,684,060
`
`IPR Case No.
`2017-00170
`2017-00171
`2017-00736
`2017-01470
`2017-01486
`2017-01645
`2017-01646
`2017-01649
`2018-00021
`2018-00135
`2017-02201
`
`
`
`As for requirement (4), as discussed above, the Agreements fully resolve all
`
`litigation and proceedings between the parties to this proceeding, with all related
`
`joint motions to terminate or dismiss in pending actions on file and pending in each
`
`action.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the parties jointly and respectfully request that the
`
`instant proceeding be terminated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Date: December 21, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`By /Christopher K. Eppich/
`Andrea G. Reister
` Registration No. 36,253
`David A. Garr
` Registration No. 74,932
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`Christopher K. Eppich
` Registration No. 52,868
`Laura E. Muschamp
` Registration No. 45,693
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`1999 Avenue of the Stars
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`
`By /Kristopher L. Reed/
`Kristopher L. Reed
` Registration No.: 58,694
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1400 Wewatta St., #600
`Denver, CO 80202
`
`Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2018-00172
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6, I hereby certify that on this 21st day of
`
`December 2017, the foregoing Joint Motion to Terminate Pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 317 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74 was served via email by agreement of the parties on the
`
`following counsel of record for Petitioner:
`
`Kristopher L. Reed (kreed@kilpatricktownsend.com)
`Matthew C. Holohan (mholohan@kilpatricktownsend.com)
`BC609IPR@kilpatricktownsend.com
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`1400 Wewatta St., #600
`Denver, CO 80202
`
`
`
`
`Date: December 21, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Christopher K. Eppich/
`Christopher K. Eppich
`Registration No.: 52,868
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`