`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 10
`Entered: December 4, 2013
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`STARWOOD HOTELS AND RESORTS WORLDWIDE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`LONE STAR WIFI, LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00102
`Patent 7,490,348 B1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JUSTIN T. ARBES, BRYAN F. MOORE, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARBES, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`On November 7, 2013, the Board entered a “Notice of Filing Date
`
`Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary
`
`Response” in the above proceeding requiring Petitioner to correct certain
`
`defects in its Petition within five business days. Paper 3. On November 13,
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00102
`Patent 7,490,348 B1
`
`2013, Petitioner contacted Board administrative staff and indicated that it
`
`
`
`would not be filing a corrected petition and desired to terminate the
`
`proceeding. Based on Petitioner’s representation, the Board authorized a
`
`motion to terminate the proceeding. Paper 4. On November 19, 2013,
`
`Petitioner filed a “Notice of Non-Participation” stating that it “no longer
`
`intends to pursue its filing or otherwise participate in IPR2014-00102.”
`
`Paper 5.
`
`A conference call was held on December 3, 2013 among respective
`
`counsel for Petitioner and Patent Owner, and Judges Arbes, Moore, and
`
`Clements. The purpose of the call was to determine whether Patent Owner
`
`opposes the proceeding being terminated given Petitioner’s intent not to
`
`participate. Patent Owner indicated during the call that it does not oppose
`
`the proceeding being terminated. Patent Owner, however, stated that it
`
`disagrees with certain statements made in the Petition regarding alleged
`
`inequitable conduct during the prosecution of an application not at issue in
`
`this proceeding, see Pet. 2-7, and requested authorization to file a paper
`
`explaining its position. As explained during the call, the Board expresses no
`
`opinion on the allegations of inequitable conduct made in the Petition, as the
`
`issue is not before the Board. Accordingly, no additional filing is
`
`authorized.
`
`Petitioner’s abandonment of the contest is construed as a request for
`
`entry of adverse judgment. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4); see also 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 325(d) (describing the effects of “the same or substantially the same prior
`
`art or arguments previously . . . presented to the Office”). Further, this case
`
`is in the “preliminary proceeding” stage; no determination as to whether to
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00102
`Patent 7,490,348 B1
`
`institute a trial has been made. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.2. Under the
`
`
`
`circumstances, the Board concludes that it is appropriate to enter judgment.
`
`
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`ORDERED that the proceeding is terminated.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00102
`Patent 7,490,348 B1
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Scott A. McKeown
`Greg Gardella
`OBLON, SPIVAK, McCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.
`CPDocketMcKeown@oblon.com
`CPDocketGardella@oblon.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Abraham Hershkovitz
`Eugene Rzucidlo
`HERSHKOVITZ & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
`ahershkovitz@hershkovitz.net
`GRzucidlo@Hershkovitz.net
`
`
`
`
`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
