UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`—————————————
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`—————————————
`
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`Petitioner-Appellee
`
`v.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`Patent Owner-Appellant
`
`
`
`—————————————
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`—————————————
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, MICHAEL R. ZECHER,
`Administrate Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER PROGRESSIVE’S
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`—————————————
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`—————————————
`
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`Petitioner-Appellee
`
`v.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`Patent Owner-Appellant
`
`
`
`—————————————
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`—————————————
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, MICHAEL R. ZECHER,
`Administrate Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER PROGRESSIVE’S
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`
`Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`c/o Office of the General Counsel
`Madison Building East, 10B20
`600 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314-5793
`
`Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 90.2(a), that Patent Owner,
`
`Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. (“Progressive”) hereby appeals to the United
`
`States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from the Final Written Decision
`
`entered on February 11, 2014 (Paper 68) (the “Final Written Decision”), and from
`
`all underlying orders, decisions, rulings and opinions, including without limitation
`
`the Decision on Institution of Covered Business Method Review entered on March
`
`28, 2013 (Paper 10) (the “Institution Decision”) and the Decision on Progressive’s
`
`Request for Rehearing entered on April 1, 2014 (Paper 78) (the “Rehearing
`
`Decision”).
`
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 90.2(a)(3)(ii), Patent Owner Progressive
`
`further indicates that the issues on appeal include, but are not limited to, the
`
`following: (1) the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) decision to institute a
`
`covered business method review under 37 C.F.R. § 42.208, including whether the
`
`PTAB’s decision exceeded its statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 326 through
`
`rulemaking; (2) the PTAB’s determination that it had jurisdiction or authority
`
`under Section 18 of the AIA to review all the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,140,358
`
`(the “’358 patent”) based on its determination that claim 1 is directed to a covered
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`business method; (3) the PTAB’s determination that the ’358 Patent is a covered
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`
`business method patent under 37 C.F.R. § 42.301; (4) the PTAB’s determination of
`
`unpatentability and cancellation of claims 1-20 of the ’358 Patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103; (5) the PTAB’s claim constructions; (6) the PTAB’s failure to exclude new
`
`evidence and arguments submitted by Petitioner for the first time in its Reply brief;
`
`(7) the denial of Patent Owner Progressive’s motion to exclude evidence; (8) the
`
`PTAB’s denial of Patent Owner Progressive’s Request for Rehearing, including its
`
`determination that it was not barred and estopped from maintaining the proceeding
`
`or entering a final written decision with respect to patentability under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`325(e)(1), as well as its determination that the Final Written Decision was not an
`
`advisory opinion; and (9) any finding or determination supporting or related to
`
`those issues, as well as all other issues decided adversely to Patent Owner
`
`Progressive in any orders, decisions, rulings and opinions.
`
`In addition to this submission, a copy of this Notice of Appeal is being filed
`
`with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Clerk’s Office for the United States
`
`Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`JONES DAY
`By /s/ Calvin P. Griffith
`Calvin P. Griffith
`Reg. No. 34,831
`JONES DAY
`North Point
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1190
`(216) 586-3939
`(216) 579-0212 (Fax)
`Attorney for Patent Owner.
`
`June 2, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`
`I hereby certify that, in addition to being filed electronically through the
`
`Board’s PRPS System, the original version of the foregoing, PATENT OWNER
`
`PROGRESSIVE’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, was filed by hand on this 2nd day of
`
`June, 2014, with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, at
`
`the following address:
`
`Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`c/o Office of the General Counsel
`Madison Building East, 10B20
`600 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314-5793
`
`I further certify that three (3) true and correct copies of the foregoing,
`
`PATENT OWNER PROGRESSIVE’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, were filed by hand
`
`on this 2nd day of June, 2014, with the Clerk’s Office of the United States Court of
`
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit, at the following address:
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`717 Madison Place, N.W., Suite 401
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`I further certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing, PATENT
`
`OWNER PROGRESSIVE’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, was served on June 2, 2014
`
`by causing it to be sent by email to counsel for Petitioner Liberty Mutual Insurance
`
`Co. at the following email addresses:
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`
`Steven.Baughman@ropesgray.com
`Nicole.Jantzi@ropesgray.com
`James.Myers@ropesgray.com
`LibertyMutualPTABService@ropesgray.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`JONES DAY
`By /s/ John V. Biernacki
`John V. Biernacki
`Reg. No. 40,511
`JONES DAY
`North Point
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1190
`(216) 586-3939
`(216) 579-0212 (Fax)
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`June 2, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
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
