`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 9
`
`
` Entered: December 28, 2017
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BROADCOM CORPORATION and BROADCOM LTD.,1
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TESSERA, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01645 (Patent 6,046,076)
`Case IPR2017-01646 (Patent 6,218,215 B1)
`Case IPR2017-01649 (Patent 6,080,605)
`Case IPR2018-00172 (Patent 6,573,609 B2)
`____________
`
`Before JUSTIN T. ARBES, JOHN A. EVANS, and CARL M. DEFRANCO,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARBES, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Termination of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`
`1 Petitioner in Cases IPR2017-01645, IPR2017-01646, and IPR2017-01649
`is Broadcom Corporation. Petitioner in Case IPR2018-00172 is
`Broadcom Ltd.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01645 (Patent 6,046,076); IPR2017-01646 (Patent 6,218,215 B1)
`IPR2017-01649 (Patent 6,080,605); IPR2018-00172 (Patent 6,573,609 B2)
`
`
`On December 21, 2017, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate in
`each of the instant proceedings on the basis of a settlement reached by the
`parties. See Paper 92 (“Mot.”); 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The
`parties also filed a copy of their written settlement agreement (Ex. 2009) and
`related agreements (Exs. 2010–2014), along with a joint request (Paper 10)
`to treat the agreements as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`The instant proceedings are still in the preliminary stages, as we have
`not yet entered a decision whether or not to institute an inter partes review
`in any of the proceedings. In the joint motions to terminate, the parties
`represent that the agreements “completely resolve all controversies between
`the Patent Owner and Petitioner, including their dispute[s] relating to” the
`challenged patents in these proceedings. Mot. 1–2, 4–5. The parties further
`state that “there are no other agreements or understandings, oral or written,
`between [Patent Owner] and [Petitioner], including any collateral
`agreements, made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the
`termination of the present proceeding[s] as set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 317(b).”
`Mot. 2. Under these circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate to
`terminate the instant proceedings without rendering any further decisions.
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.72.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the request in each of the instant proceedings that the
`agreements be treated as business confidential information, kept separate
`from the file of the respective challenged patent, and made available only to
`
`
`2 The parties filed similar papers in each of the instant proceedings.
`We refer to those filed in Case IPR2017-01645 for convenience.
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01645 (Patent 6,046,076); IPR2017-01646 (Patent 6,218,215 B1)
`IPR2017-01649 (Patent 6,080,605); IPR2018-00172 (Patent 6,573,609 B2)
`
`Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a
`showing of good cause, under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c),
`is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate in each of
`the instant proceedings is granted and the proceedings are hereby
`terminated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01645 (Patent 6,046,076); IPR2017-01646 (Patent 6,218,215 B1)
`IPR2017-01649 (Patent 6,080,605); IPR2018-00172 (Patent 6,573,609 B2)
`
`PETITIONER (CASES IPR2017-01645, IPR2017-01646, AND
`IPR2017-01649):
`
`George C. Beck
`Steven J. Rizzi
`Andrew R. Cheslock
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`gbeck@foley.com
`srizzi@foley.com
`acheslock@foley.com
`
`
`PETITIONER (CASE IPR2018-00172):
`
`Kristopher L. Reed
`Matthew C. Holohan
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
`kreed@kilpatricktownsend.com
`mholohan@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`David A. Garr
`Andrea G. Reister
`Christopher K. Eppich
`Laura E. Muschamp
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`dgarr@cov.com
`areister@cov.com
`ceppich@cov.com
`lmuschamp@cov.com
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`