`571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 11
`Date: June 2, 2025
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`CROGA INNOVATIONS LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2025-00380
`Patent 10,601,780 B2
`
`
`Before TERRENCE W. McMILLIN, KEVIN C. TROCK, and
`RUSSELL E. CASS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McMILLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DISMISSAL
`Due to Settlement Prior To Institution of Trial
`35 U.S.C. § 317; 37 C.F.R. § 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2025-00380
`Patent 10,601,780 B2
`
`DISCUSSION
`I.
`With the Board’s authorization, Petitioner and Patent Owner
`(collectively “the Parties”) filed a Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding due
`to settlement. Paper 8 (“Joint Motion”). In support of the Joint Motion, the
`Parties filed a Confidential Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1020 (“Settlement
`Agreement”)), as well as a Joint Request to Treat the Settlement Agreement
`as Business Confidential Information (Paper 9 (“Joint Request”)) pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74.
`In the Joint Motion, the Parties represent that they have reached an
`agreement to jointly seek termination1 of this inter partes review
`proceeding, and that the filed copy of the Settlement Agreement is a true and
`complete copy. Joint Motion 1. The Parties further represent that they
`“have reached a settlement as to all the disputes in this proceeding and as to
`[US Patent No. 10,601,780]” and that “the documents filed as Exhibit 1020
`represent all agreements made in connection with, or in contemplation of,
`the termination of this proceeding.” Id. at 2
`The Petition (Paper 2) in this proceeding was filed on December 30,
`2024. We have not yet decided whether to institute an inter partes review
`based upon the Petition and the Parties have shown adequately that the
`dismissal of the Petition and the proceeding is appropriate. Under these
`circumstances, we determine that good cause exists to dismiss the Petition
`
`
`1 Dismissal of the Petition and this proceeding is more appropriate than
`termination as trial has not been instituted. Dismissal of the Petition means
`that the Petition will not be considered and no inter partes review will be
`instituted based upon the Petition. Accordingly, dismissal of the Petition
`and the proceeding means that, absent further order, all action with regard to
`the Petition and the proceeding is terminated.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2025-00380
`Patent 10,601,780 B2
`and the proceeding.
`After reviewing the Settlement Agreement between Petitioner and
`Patent Owner, we find that the Settlement Agreement contains confidential
`business information regarding the terms of settlement. We determine that
`good cause exists to treat the Settlement Agreement between Petitioner and
`Patent Owner as business confidential information pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`This Order does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to 35
`U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`II. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding (Paper 8)
`is granted, and the Petition and IPR2025-00380 are hereby dismissed; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Request (Paper 9) to Treat the
`Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1020) as Business Confidential Information is
`granted, and the Settlement Agreement shall be kept separate from the files
`of US Patent No. 10,601,780 B2, and made available only to Federal
`Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a showing of
`good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2025-00380
`Patent 10,601,780 B2
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`John Keville
`Darren Franklin
`James Hurt
`SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
`jkeville@sheppardmullin.com
`dfranklin@sheppardmullin.com
`jhurt@sheppardmullin.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brett Cooper
`Seth Lindner
`BC LAW GROUP, P.C.
`bcooper@bc-lawgroup.com
`slindner@bc-lawgroup.com
`
`Robert Auchter
`AUCHTER PLLC
`robert@auchterlaw.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
