`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper: 73
`Entered: April 26, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`IBG LLC, and
`INTERACTIVE BROKERS, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case CBM2016-00009
`Patent No. 7,685,055 B2
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, and
`JEREMY M. PLENZLER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PETRAVICK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Motions to Seal
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14 and 42.54
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.14, Patent Owner filed a motion to seal
`Exhibits 2294 and 2295 in their entirety. Paper 30. Patent Owner represents
`that Petitioner does not oppose the motion. Id. at 1.
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00009
`Patent 7,685,055 B2
`
`There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in a
`covered business method patent review open to the public. Under 35 U.S.C.
`§ 326(a)(1), the default rule is that all papers filed in a covered business
`method patent review are open and available for access by the public; a
`party, however, may file a concurrent motion to seal (37 C.F.R. § 42.14).
`The standard for granting a motion to seal is “for good cause.” 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.54. The party moving to seal bears the burden of proof in showing
`entitlement to the requested relief, and must explain why the information
`sought to be sealed constitutes confidential information. 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.20(c).
`Patent Owner asserts that there is good cause to seal the papers and
`exhibits because they contain third-party sensitive business information and
`confidential admissions/statements that would not otherwise be published or
`made available to the public. Paper 30, 4–5. We agree. The information
`Patent Owner seeks to seal was not relied on in the Final Written Decision.
`As such protecting the confidential information from public disclosure only
`minimally impacts the public’s interest in maintaining a complete file
`history. Further, the third-parties object to the release of their confidential
`information into the public domain. Id. at 4.
`A motion to seal is required to include a proposed protective order and
`a certification that the moving party has in good faith conferred or attempted
`to confer with the opposing party in an effort to come to an agreement as to
`the scope of the proposed protective order for this covered business method
`patent review. 37 C.F.R. § 42.54. Patent Owner indicates that the parties
`have conferred and agree to entry of the default protective located at Office
`
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00009
`Patent 7,685,055 B2
`
`Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48771 (Aug. 14, 2012) (Appendix
`B). Paper 30, 5.
`Based on Patent Owner’s unopposed representations and the
`reasonably limited scope of the protection sought, we determined that good
`cause exists to grant the motion to seal. 37 C.F.R. § 42.54.
`
`It is:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion to seal is granted.
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Robert E. Sokohl
`Lori Gordon
`Richard M. Bemben
`Stern, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
`
`lgordon-ptab@skgf.com
`rsokohl-ptab@skgf.com
`rbemben-ptab@skgf.com
`PTAB@skgf.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Leif R. Sigmond
`Cole B. Richter
`Michael D. Gannon
`Jennifer M. Kurcz
`McDonnell, Boehen, Hulbert & Berghoff LLP
`
`sigmond@mbhb.com
`richter@mbhb.com
`gannon@mbhb.com
`kurcz@mbhb.com
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00009
`Patent 7,685,055 B2
`
`Jay Q. Knobloch
`Steven F. Borsand
`Trading Technologies International, INC.
`
`cbm@tradingtechnologies.com
`tt-patent-cbm@tradingtechnologies.com
`
`
`4
`
`
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
