`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 9
`Date: October 4, 2017
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`LOCTEK ERGONOMIC TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`VARIDESK LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case PGR2017-00036
`Patent 9,554,644 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMES A. TARTAL, CARL M. DEFRANCO, and
`MICHAEL L. WOODS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WOODS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Dismissing Petition Pursuant to Settlement
`37 C.F.R. § 42.71(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PGR2017-00036
`Patent 9,544,644 B2
`
`
`
`I. Introduction
`On September 27, 2017, Petitioner, Loctek, Inc. (“Petitioner”), and
`Patent Owner, Varidesk LLC (“Patent Owner”), (collectively referred to as
`“the parties”), filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Proceeding Pursuant to 37
`C.F.R. § 42.71(a). Paper 6 (“Joint Motion to Dismiss”).1 Along with the
`Joint Motion to Dismiss, the parties filed a true copy of a Patent License,
`Settlement, and Release Agreement (Paper 7, “Settlement Agreement”),2 as
`well as a Joint Request to Treat Settlement Documents as Business
`Confidential Information and to Keep Separate under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b)
`and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 8 (“Joint Motion to Keep Confidential”)).
`
`II. Discussion
`In the Joint Motion to Dismiss, the parties represent that they have
`settled their dispute and have reached an agreement to dismiss this post grant
`review. Paper 6, 2. The parties further represent that the parties have
`reached settlement resolving all of their disputes. Id. at 3.
`This proceeding is at an early stage. Patent Owner has not filed a
`preliminary response and we have not yet decided whether to institute trial.
`In view of the early stage of this proceeding, and the settlement between the
`parties, we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the petition and
`
`
`1 Filing of the Joint Motion to Dismiss was authorized in e-mail
`correspondence from Board personnel on September 25, 2017.
`2 Although the parties identify the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit 1016,
`the document was filed as Paper 7, rather than as an exhibit. See
`https://ptabint.uspto.gov/ (last visited September 29, 2017). We will cite to
`Paper 7 as the document filed when referring to the Settlement Agreement
`with the clarification that we understand the parties to be referring to Paper 7
`when they cite to Exhibit 1016.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`PGR2017-00036
`Patent 9,544,644 B2
`
`
`terminate the proceeding with respect to both parties. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.71(a). Therefore, we grant the Joint Motion to Dismiss. This paper
`does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`III. Orders
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Dismiss (Paper 6) is granted, and
`
`the petition is hereby dismissed and the proceeding terminated; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Keep Confidential
`(Paper 8) is also granted, and the Settlement Agreement (Paper 7) will be
`treated as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37
`C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PGR2017-00036
`Patent 9,544,644 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Patrick J. McCarthy
`Jonathan D. Ball
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`mccarthyp@gtlaw.com
`ballj@gtlaw.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Steven J. Schwarz
`VENABLE LLP
`sjschwarz@venable.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`