Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 103-1 Filed 04/18/22 Page 1 of 4
`
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`Jeremy J. Taylor (SBN 249075)
`jeremy.taylor@bakerbotts.com
`Arya Moshiri (SBN 324231)
`arya.moshiri@bakerbotts.com
`101 California St., Ste. 3600
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Telephone: 415.291.6200
`Facsimile: 415.291.6300
`Kurt M. Pankratz (pro hac vice)
`Bethany R. Salpietra (pro hac vice)
`kurt.pankratz@bakerbotts.com
`bethany.salpietra@bakerbotts.com
`2001 Ross Ave., Ste. 900
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Telephone: 214.953.6500
`Facsimile: 214.953.6503
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Lyft, Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`LYFT, INC.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`Defendant.
`
`Case No. 5:21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`DECLARATION OF BETHANY R.
`SALPIETRA IN SUPPORT OF
`PLAINTIFF LYFT, INC.’S MOTION TO
`STAY PENDING PATENT OFFICE
`PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE
`PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`Date: August 11, 2022
`Time: 9:00 a.m.
`Judge: Hon. Beth Labson Freeman
`Trial Date: October 16, 2023
`Courtroom: 3, Fifth Floor
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`SALPIETRA DECL. ISO LYFT’S MOTION
`TO STAY PENDING PATENT OFFICE PROCEEDINGS
`INVOLVING THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`
`
`CASE No. 5:21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`

`

`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 103-1 Filed 04/18/22 Page 2 of 4
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`I, Bethany R. Salpietra, declare as follows:
`1.
`I am over the age of 21 and am fully competent to make this declaration. I have
`personal knowledge of all facts recited herein and state that such facts are true and correct to my
`knowledge or information and belief, and, if called upon to do so, I would testify competently about
`them.
`
`I am duly admitted to practice law in the State of Texas and before this Court. I am
`2.
`counsel at the law firm of Baker Botts L.L.P., 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 900, Dallas, TX 75201, and
`I represent Lyft, Inc. (“Lyft”) in the above-captioned action.
`3.
`I have reviewed and complied with the Northern District of California’s Civil L.R.
`(dated November 1, 2021).
`4.
`I make this Declaration in support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay Pending Patent Office
`Proceedings Involving the Patents-in-Suit.
`Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the Ex Parte
`5.
`Reexamination Certificate for U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970, which issued on December 9, 2021.
`Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the Order Granting Request
`6.
`for Ex Parte Reexamination regarding U.S. Patent 7,031,728 (“the ’728 Patent”) mailed by the
`United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) on December 6, 2021.
`Attached as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of the Order Granting Request for
`7.
`Ex Parte Reexamination regarding U.S. Patent 7,630,724 (“the ’724 Patent”) mailed by the USPTO
`on December 7, 2021.
`Attached as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of the Decision on Petition for
`8.
`Extension of Time in Reexamination regarding the ’728 Patent mailed by the USPTO on January
`28, 2022.
`Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of the Decision on Petition for
`9.
`Extension of Time in Reexamination regarding the ’724 Patent mailed by the USPTO on January
`28, 2022.
`Attached as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of the Reexamination operational
`10.
`statistics updated in March 2022 by the USPTO.
`
`SALPIETRA DECL. ISO LYFT’S MOTION
`TO STAY PENDING PATENT OFFICE PROCEEDINGS
`INVOLVING THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`1
`
`CASE No. 5:21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`

`

`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 103-1 Filed 04/18/22 Page 3 of 4
`
`Attached as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of the Decision Granting Institution
`11.
`of Inter Partes Review regarding U.S. Patent 10,341,838 (“the ’838 Patent”) by the Patent Trial and
`Appeal Board (“PTAB”) on January 7, 2022 in IPR2021-01306.
`Attached as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy of the Decision Granting Institution
`12.
`of Inter Partes Review regarding U.S. Patent 10,299,100 (“the ’100 Patent”) by the PTAB on
`January 7, 2022 in IPR2021-01307.
`Attached as Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of the Decision Granting Institution
`13.
`of Inter Partes Review regarding U.S. Patent 10,299,100 (“the ’100 Patent”) by the PTAB on
`January 7, 2022 in IPR2021-01308.
`Attached as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of email correspondence between
`14.
`counsel for Lyft, Inc. and counsel for AGIS Software Development LLC.
`Attached as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of Ex Parte Reexamination
`15.
`Historical Statistics updated in March 2021 by the USPTO.
`Attached as Exhibit 12 is a true and correct copy of a USPTO presentation entitled
`16.
`“PTAB Trial Statistics FY21 End of Year Outcome Roundup IPR, PGR, CBM” regarding Fiscal
`Year 2021.
`Attached as Exhibit 13 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of the Transcript of
`17.
`Proceedings before the Honorable Beth Labson Freeman on January 27, 2022 in the above-
`captioned case.
`Attached as Exhibit 14 is a true and correct copy of the Petition for Inter Partes
`18.
`Review regarding the ’838 Patent filed by Lyft on January 28, 2022 in IPR2021-00513.
`Attached as Exhibit 15 is a true and correct copy of the Petition for Inter Partes
`19.
`Review regarding the ’100 Patent filed by Lyft on January 28, 2022 in IPR2021-00514.
`Attached as Exhibit 16 is a true and correct copy of the Petition for Inter Partes
`20.
`Review regarding the ’100 Patent filed by Lyft on January 28, 2022 in IPR2021-00515.
`
`SALPIETRA DECL. ISO LYFT’S MOTION
`TO STAY PENDING PATENT OFFICE PROCEEDINGS
`INVOLVING THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`2
`
`CASE No. 5:21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`

`

`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 103-1 Filed 04/18/22 Page 4 of 4
`
`Executed on this 18 day of April, 2022, at Dallas, Texas, County of Dallas. I declare under
`penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and
`correct to the best of my knowledge.
`
`Dated: April 18, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Bethany R. Salpietra
`Bethany R. Salpietra
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Lyft, Inc.
`
`SALPIETRA DECL. ISO LYFT’S MOTION
`TO STAY PENDING PATENT OFFICE PROCEEDINGS
`INVOLVING THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`3
`
`CASE No. 5:21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`