`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 15
`
`
`
` Entered: December 4, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INFINERA, CORP.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CHEETAH OPTICS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00339
`Patent 6,888,661
`____________
`
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, STEPHEN C. SIU, and MIRIAM L. QUINN,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`TURNER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00339
`Patent 6,888,661
`
`On November 24, 2013, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate
`
`(“Motion,” Paper 13) with respect to this inter partes review. With the joint
`
`motion, the parties filed a copy of their written settlement agreement (Ex.
`
`2001) covering Patent 6,888,661 involved in this proceeding. The parties
`
`also filed, on November 24, 2013, a joint request to have their settlement
`
`agreement treated as confidential business information under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 14.
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under
`
`this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint
`
`request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the
`
`merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The
`
`requirement for terminating review with respect to Petitioner (“Infinera”) is
`
`met.
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “If no petitioner remains in the inter partes
`
`review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written
`
`decision under section 318(a).” Infinera is the sole petitioner in this review.
`
`The Board has discretion to terminate this review with respect to the patent
`
`owner (“Cheetah”). The Board notes that no decision on institution of this
`
`proceeding has been made, and that there are no outstanding motions in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`The Board acknowledges that the written settlement agreement (Ex.
`
`2001) appears to be a true copy, and that the parties seek settlement of the
`
`actions between them, specifically including the instant proceeding,
`
`IPR2013-00339, in the matters to be settled.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00339
`Patent 6,888,661
`
`In the Motion, the parties represent that Infinera is not and never has
`
`been a defendant in either pending litigation involving Patent 6,888,661.
`
`Motion 2. The parties also represent that none of the defendants in the
`
`related litigations, provided therein, are or have ever been a real party in
`
`interest in this proceeding. Motion 2-3. Additionally, the defendants in such
`
`other related litigations have not filed a petition for inter partes review of
`
`Patent 6,888,661. There is no pending motion by any third party for joinder
`
`with this inter partes review.
`
`The Board determines that, in the circumstances of this case, it is
`
`appropriate to terminate review both as to Infinera and Cheetah without
`
`rendering a final written decision See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.72.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00339 is
`
`GRANTED, and this inter partes review is hereby terminated as to all
`
`parties, including Infinera and Cheetah; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request to have their
`
`settlement agreement treated as business confidential information under the
`
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) is also GRANTED.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00339
`Patent 6,888,661
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Kevin E. Greene
`Timothy Riffe
`Fish & Richardson
`axf@fr.com
`greene@fr.com
`riffe@fr.com
`21141-0001IP1@fr.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Richard Krukar
`Ortiz & Lopez, PLLC
`krukar@olpatentlaw.com
`
`
`Mohammed N. Islam
`Patent Owner
`mni@eecs.umich.edu
`
`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
