`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 9
`Entered: February 1, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`INTRALINKS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LONE STAR DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`Case CBM2016-00005
`Patent 6,918,082
`
`
`Before MIRIAM L. QUINN, BEVERLY M. BUNTING, and KEVIN W.
`CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BUNTING, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceedings
`35 U.S.C. § 327(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00005
`Patent 6,918,082
`
`
`
`On January 19, 2016, Intralinks, Inc. and Lone Star Document
`Management, LLC (collectively referred to as “the parties”) filed a joint
`motion to terminate this covered business method patent review involving
`U.S. Patent No. 6,918,082 pursuant to a settlement agreement. Paper 6.
`Authorization to file the motion was given in a phone conference between
`the Board and the parties on January 8, 2016. Id. at 1. The parties also filed
`a true copy of their written settlement agreement, made in connection with
`the termination of this proceeding, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(b)
`and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Ex. 1003. Additionally, the parties request to have
`their settlement agreement treated as confidential business information under
`35 U.S.C. § 327(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 6 at 2–3.
`The parties submit that termination is appropriate because the parties
`have settled their dispute regarding the challenged patent and have reached
`agreement to terminate this covered business method review. Id. at 2. The
`parties represent that the settlement agreement ends all patent disputes
`between the parties, including their pending district court litigation, which
`was dismissed without prejudice. Id. at 1–2.
`The parties are reminded that the Board is not a party to the
`settlement, and may identify independently any question of patentability.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(a). Generally, however, the Board expects that a
`proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement agreement. See,
`e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00005
`Patent 6,918,082
`
`
`
`14, 2012). The instant proceeding is still in the preliminary stages,1 and the
`Board has not issued yet a decision to institute a covered business method
`review.
`Under the circumstances, based on the record before us, we determine
`that it is appropriate to terminate this proceeding with respect to both
`Petitioner and Patent Owner, at this early juncture, to promote efficiency and
`minimize unnecessary costs. Based on the facts, it is appropriate to enter
`judgment terminating this proceeding without rendering a final written
`decision and treat the settlement agreement as business confidential
`information. See 35 U.S.C. § 327; 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72 and 42.74(c).
`
`
`ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is
`
`ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the settlement
`
`agreement (Exhibit 1003) be treated as business confidential information
`under 35 U.S.C. § 327(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), to be kept separate from
`the patent file, is GRANTED;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate CBM2016-
`00005 is GRANTED; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is TERMINATED.
`
`
`
`
`1 The deadline to file a patent owner preliminary response is February 3,
`2016.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`CBM2016-00005
`Patent 6,918,082
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Jonathan Bockman
`jbockman@mofo.com
`
`Fahd Hussein Patel
`fpatel@mofo.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Timothy Devlin
`tdevlin@devlinlawfirm.com
`
`Xiyan Zhang
`xzhang@devlinlawfirm.com
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
