throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 15
`
`Entered: February 2, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`TEXTRON INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NIVEL PARTS & MANUFACTURING CO., LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`PGR2017-00035
`PGR2017-00043
`Patent 9,481,265 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JAMES A. TARTAL, TIMOTHY J. GOODSON, and
`JAMES J. MAYBERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MAYBERRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION1
`Granting Updated Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`Granting Updated Request to Treat Settlement Documents
`as Confidential Business Information
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b); 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c)
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses the same issue in the proceedings listed above.
`Therefore, we issue one Order to be filed in each proceeding. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style of filing.
`
`

`

`PGR2017-00035
`PGR2017-00043
`Patent 9,481,265 B2
`
`Pursuant to our authorization, on January 19, 2017, the parties filed a
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding (Paper 112) and a Joint Request That
`Settlement Related Agreements be Treated as Business Confidential
`Information (Paper 12), seeking to terminate PGR2017-00035 and
`PGR2017-00043.3 Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b), the parties also filed a
`true copy of their written settlement agreement (Ex. 2008) in each of the
`proceedings. Ex. 2008 is entitled “Binding Term Sheet” and contemplates
`the parties executing a formal agreement.
`On January 23, 2018, we informed the parties that we would not rule
`on the Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding until they filed the formal
`agreement. On January 25, 2018, the parties filed an Updated Motion to
`Terminate Proceeding (Paper 13) and Updated Joint Request That
`Settlement Related Agreements be Treated as Business Confidential
`Information (Paper 14). Filed concurrent with these papers was a formal
`written settlement agreement (Ex. 2009).
`In the Updated Joint Motion to Terminate, the parties indicate that
`they have reached an agreement regarding all of their disputes involving
`U.S. Patent No. 9,481,265 B2 (the “’265 patent”). Paper 13, 3. This
`settlement includes PGR2017-00035 and PGR2017-00043 and a co-pending
`district court case. Id. at 3. The parties certify that “there are no other
`
`
`2 We cite to the record in PGR2017-00035. Similar documents were filed in
`each of the proceedings to which this Order applies.
`3 The parties filed separate Joint Motions to Terminate in PGR2017-00035
`and PGR2017-00043. See PGR2017-00035, Paper 11; PGR2017-00043,
`Paper 9. These motions are identical except for certain details unique to
`each proceeding. See id.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`PGR2017-00035
`PGR2017-00043
`Patent 9,481,265 B2
`
`written or oral agreements or understandings, including any collateral
`agreements, between them” with respect to this settlement. Id. at 6.
`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.” The
`parties indicate that, under the settlement agreement, Petitioner agrees to no
`longer participate in the proceedings. Paper 13, 4. The parties state that the
`Board has not reached the merits of the proceedings, as the Board just
`instituted trial in PGR-2017-00035 and the Board has yet to reach an
`institution decision in PGR2017-00043. Id. at 4, 5. The parties also indicate
`that terminating these proceedings will preserve the Board’s and parties’
`resources. Id. at 4.
`In view of the circumstances presented in this case, we agree that
`terminating these proceedings is proper at this time. Indeed, 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, we have not rendered a Final
`Written Decision on the merits, we generally expect that the proceeding will
`terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See id.
`Based on the preceding, we determine that it is appropriate to
`terminate these proceedings without rendering a Final Written Decision as to
`the patentability of the challenged claims of the ’265 patent.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`PGR2017-00035
`PGR2017-00043
`Patent 9,481,265 B2
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the parties’ requests that the settlement agreements
`(PGR2017-00035, Exs. 2008 and 2009; PGR2017-00043, Exs. 2006 and
`2007) be treated as business confidential information and kept separate from
`the files of U.S. Patent No. 9,481,265 B2, under the provisions of 35 U.S.C.
`§ 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), are granted; and
`ORDERED that the Updated Joint Motions to Terminate these
`proceedings are granted, and these proceeding are hereby terminated.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`PGR2017-00035
`PGR2017-00043
`Patent 9,481,265 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Patrick A. Doody
`Bryan P. Collins
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
`patrick.doody@pillsburylaw.com
`bryan.collins@pillsburylaw.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joel Weiss
`Edward M. Arons
`Jacob Baldinger
`WEISS & ARONS, LLP
`jweiss@weissarons.com
`earons@weissarons.com
`jbaldinger@weissarons.com
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

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