`Date: February 24, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`IRON DOME LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`E-WATCH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2014-00439
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`_______________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00439
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`
`On February 23, 2015, a telephone conference call was held between
`
`
`
`respective counsel for the parties and Judges Lee, Anderson, and Clements.
`
`The parties sought authorization to file a joint motion to terminate this
`
`proceeding on the basis that the parties have settled. During the conference
`
`call, the parties also indicated that they will file their settlement agreement
`
`and a request to have the settlement agreement treated as business
`
`confidential information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`Generally, 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. 48756, 48768 (Aug. 14, 2012). Any agreement or
`
`understanding between the parties made in connection with, or in
`
`contemplation of, the termination of a proceeding shall be in writing and a
`
`true copy of the agreement shall be filed with the Board prior to termination.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b).
`
`The joint motion to terminate should include: (1) a brief explanation
`
`as to why termination as to all parties is appropriate; and (2) the identity of
`
`all parties in any related district court case involving the patent at issue in
`
`this proceeding and the status of such cases.
`
`The joint motion to terminate must be accompanied by a true copy of
`
`the fully executed settlement agreement in connection with the termination
`
`of that proceeding, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74(b). A redacted version of the settlement agreement is not a true
`
`copy of the settlement agreement.
`
`With respect to having the settlement agreement treated as business
`
`confidential information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), the parties must file the
`
`confidential settlement agreement electronically via the Patent Review
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00439
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`Processing System (PRPS). The request to have the settlement agreement
`
`
`
`treated as business confidential information should be in a submission
`
`separate from the Joint Motion to Terminate.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that the parties are authorized to file a Joint Motion to
`
`Terminate Proceeding on the basis that the parties have settled;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion is due on March 5, 2015,
`
`limited to seven pages;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion must be accompanied by
`
`a true copy, labeled as an exhibit, of the settlement agreement as required by
`
`35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b) (upload as “Board Only”); and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties may file a separate joint
`
`motion, by March 5, 2015, requesting that the settlement agreement be
`
`treated as business confidential information as specified by 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74(c).
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00439
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Steven Yu
`ROZMED LLC
`syu@patent-intercept.com
`
`Holly Li
`hyingli@ipadvantages.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert C. Curfiss
`David O. Simmons
`bob@curfiss.com
`dsimmons1@sbcglobal.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
