`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: July 2, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`UNIFIED WEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`RECURSIVE WEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC and
`SPIDER SEARCH ANALYTICS, LLC
`Patent Owners.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019-00472
`Patent 7,454,430 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before NEIL T. POWELL, JESSICA C. KAISER, and JOHN R. KENNY,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KENNY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Termination of the Proceeding
`35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.74
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00472
`Patent 7,454,430 B1
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`On April 10, 2019, in response to a joint email request from the
`
`parties, we authorized the parties to file a joint motion to terminate this case
`and a joint request to file their settlement agreement as business confidential
`information. With that authorization, the parties filed a Joint Motion to
`Dismiss Under 35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74 (Paper 6, “Joint
`Mot.”) and a Joint Motion to Keep Confidential and Separate Under 35
`U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 7). The parties also filed a
`copy of their written settlement agreement under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b).
`Ex. 1019. For the reasons discussed below, the parties’ Joint Motion to
`Dismiss and Joint Request to Treat as Confidential and Separate are granted.
`
`In the Joint Motion to Dismiss, the parties indicate that termination of
`this proceeding is appropriate because they have settled their disputes
`involving U.S. Patent No. 7,454,430. Joint Mot. 1. Further, the parties
`represent that there are no other collateral agreements or understandings
`made that relate to the termination of this IPR. Id. at 1. In addition, as the
`parties indicate, this proceeding is at an early stage, and trial has not been
`instituted. Id. at 2.
`
`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
`merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” Further,
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b), “[a]ny agreement or understanding between the
`parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of a
`proceeding shall be in writing and a true copy shall be filed with the Board
`before termination of the trial.”
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00472
`Patent 7,454,430 B1
`
`There are strong public policy reasons to favor settlement between the
`
`parties to a proceeding. Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). When, as here, the proceeding is still in its
`preliminary stages and we have not entered a decision on whether or not to
`institute an inter partes proceeding, we generally expect that the proceeding
`will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See id. Because the
`parties have filed their written settlement agreement, we determine that it is
`appropriate to terminate this proceeding. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.74.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that the parties’ request to treat the settlement agreement
`
`(Ex. 1019) as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b)
`and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) is GRANTED; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ request to terminate this
`proceeding is GRANTED, and this proceeding is terminated.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00472
`Patent 7,454,430 B1
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Jason Mudd
`Eric Buresh
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`jason.mudd@eriseip.com
`eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`
`
`
`Jonathan Bowser
`Roshan Mansinghani
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`jbowser@unifiedpatents.com
`roshan@unifiedpatents.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Richard Baker
`NEW ENGLAND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, LLC
`rbaker@newenglandip.com
`
`Alexander Pokot
`AP PATENTS
`alex@ap-patents.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
