`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 58
`Filed: October 31, 2014
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`CLIO USA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`THE PROCTER AND GAMBLE COMPANY,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00448
`Patent 5,891,453
`_______________
`
`
`Before LINDA M. GAUDETTE, JAMES P. CALVE, and
`SCOTT E. KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00448
`Patent 5,891,453
`
`
`
`The parties filed a joint motion to terminate the instant proceeding
`
`(Paper 55 (“Mot.”)), and a true copy of their written settlement agreement
`
`(Ex. 2037) made in connection with the termination, in accordance with
`
`35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). The parties also jointly requested
`
`that their settlement agreement be treated as business confidential
`
`information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 56.
`
`For the reasons provided below, the joint motion to terminate is
`
`granted. The joint request that the settlement agreement be treated as
`
`business confidential information is also granted.
`
`While the parties may agree to settle their issues related to the
`
`involved patent, the Board is not a party to the settlement and may determine
`
`independently any question of patentability. 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(a).
`
`The Board has not yet decided the merits of this proceeding. The
`
`parties represent that the ’453 patent is the subject of a district court action,
`
`Procter & Gamble Co. v. Team Techs., Inc., No. 1:12-cv-00552-TSB (S.D.
`
`Ohio), in which a consent judgment has been requested. Mot. 2. The parties
`
`further represent that these matters are covered by the settlement agreement.
`
`Id.
`
`In view of the parties’ settlement agreement made in connection with
`
`the termination in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74(b), we determine that it is appropriate to terminate the involvement
`
`of Petitioner. Moreover, we determine that it also is appropriate to terminate
`
`the proceeding with respect to Patent Owner, because we have not yet
`
`decided the merits of this proceeding. As a result, it is appropriate to enter
`
`judgment in the form of termination. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00448
`Patent 5,891,453
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`
`
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2013-00448 is
`
`granted, and this proceeding is hereby terminated as to all parties, including
`
`Petitioner Clio USA, Inc. and Patent Owner The Procter & Gamble
`
`Company; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint request that the settlement
`
`agreement be treated as business confidential information and be kept
`
`separate from the patent files under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74(c) is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00448
`Patent 5,891,453
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`William H. Oldach III
`Susanne M. Hopkins
`Ari G. Zytcer
`VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`David M. Maiorana
`John V. Biernacki
`Kenneth S. Luchesi
`JONES DAY
`
`
`David M. Weirich
`THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY
`
`
` 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
