Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: September 15, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00843
`IPR2014-00923
`IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B21
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, DEBRA K. STEPHENS, JONI Y. CHANG,
`SUSAN L.C. MITCHELL, and JENNIFER M. MEYER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceeding before Institution
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses the same issue in the above-identified cases.
`Therefore, we issue one Decision to be entered in all cases. The parties may
`not use this style of filing in subsequent papers, without prior authorization.
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822 Entered: September 15, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00843
`IPR2014-00923
`IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B21
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, DEBRA K. STEPHENS, JONI Y. CHANG,
`SUSAN L.C. MITCHELL, and JENNIFER M. MEYER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceeding before Institution
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses the same issue in the above-identified cases.
`Therefore, we issue one Decision to be entered in all cases. The parties may
`not use this style of filing in subsequent papers, without prior authorization.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B2
`
`On September 12, 2014, Petitioner, Intel Corporation (“Intel”), and
`
`Patent Owner, Zond, LLC (“Zond”), filed a Joint Motion to Terminate in
`
`each of the above-identified proceedings, involving of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,806,652 (“the ’652 patent”). Paper 7.2 The parties also filed a true
`
`copy of their Written Settlement Agreement, made in connection with the
`
`termination of the proceedings, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Ex. 1115.3 Additionally, the parties submitted a Joint
`
`Request to have their Written Settlement Agreement treated as confidential
`
`business information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`Paper 7, 9. For the reasons set forth below, the Joint Motions to Terminate
`
`and the Joint Request are granted.
`
`In their Joint Motions to Terminate, the parties indicate that they have
`
`settled all of their disputes involving the following patents: U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`6,805,779 B2, 6,806,652 B1, 6,853,142 B2, 7,147,759 B2, 7,604,716 B2,
`
`7,808,184 B2, and 7,811,421 B2. Id. at 1. In particular, the parties have
`
`agreed to settle and dismiss their related district court litigation, Zond, LLC
`
`v. Intel Corp., No.1:13-cv-11570-RGS (D. Mass.). Id. More importantly,
`
`the parties also have submitted Motions to Terminate all other inter partes
`
`reviews requested by Intel for the aforementioned patents. The proceedings,
`
`involving those patents, are listed in the Appendix of this Decision.
`
`
`2 For the purpose of clarity and expediency, we treat IPR2014-00843 as
`representative, and all citations are to IPR2014-00843 unless otherwise
`noted.
`
`3 As authorized by the Board’s previous Order, the parties filed one copy of
`their Written Settlement Agreement in IPR2014-00843 for all the above-
`identified proceedings.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B2
`
`Intel filed a Petition and, in response, Zond filed a Preliminary
`
`Response in each of the above-identified proceedings. However, we have
`
`not determined yet the merits of the proceedings—specifically, whether an
`
`inter partes review of the ’652 patent should be instituted.
`
`Zond urges the Board to terminate the above-identified proceedings
`
`with respect to both parties, because concluding the proceedings, at this
`
`early stage, would promote efficiency and reduce cost, consistent with the
`
`legislative intent. Paper 7, 5–8 (citing 154 Cong. Rec. S9987 (daily ed.
`
`Sept. 27, 2008) (statement of Sen. Kyl); 157 Cong. Rec. S1376 (daily ed.
`
`Mar. 8, 2001) (statement of Sen. Kyl)). Zond contends that terminating the
`
`proceedings upon settlement would “establish a more efficient and
`
`streamlined patent system that, inter alia, limits unnecessary and
`
`counterproductive litigation cost,” and “foster[] an environment that
`
`promotes settlements, thereby creating a timely, cost-effective alternative to
`
`litigation.” Id. at 5–6.
`
`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. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). As no trial has been
`
`instituted based on Intel’s Petitions involving the ’652 patent, each of the
`
`proceedings is in the preliminary proceeding stage.4 Upon consideration of
`
`the facts before us, we determine that it is appropriate to terminate the
`
`above-identified proceedings as to both parties, and enter judgment.
`
`
`4 A preliminary proceeding begins with the filing of a petition for instituting
`a trial and ends with a written decision as to whether a trial will be instituted.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B2
`
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`
`
`
`ORDERED that the Joint Motions to Terminate the above-identified
`
`inter partes reviews are granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the above-identified proceedings are
`
`terminated as to all parties—namely, Intel and Zond; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Request that their
`
`Written Settlement Agreement be treated as business confidential
`
`information kept separate from the patent file, and made available only to
`
`Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any person on a
`
`showing of good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74(c), is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Richard Goldenberg
`Richard.Goldenberg@wilmerhale.com
`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`David.Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Gregory J. Gonsalves
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`Bruce J. Barker
`bbarker@chsblaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`Patent 6,806,652 B2
`
`APPENDIX
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,805,779 B2
`IPR2014-00598, IPR2014-00686, IPR2014-00765, IPR2014-00820,
`IPR2014-00913
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,806,652 B1
`IPR2014-00843, IPR2014-00923, IPR2014-00945
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,853,142 B2
`IPR2014-00494, IPR2014-00495, IPR2014-00496, IPR2014-00497,
`IPR2014-00498
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,147,759 B2
`IPR2014-00443, IPR2014-00444, IPR2014-00445, IPR2014-00446,
`IPR2014-00447
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,604,716 B2
`IPR2014-00520, IPR2014-00521, IPR2014-00522, IPR2014-00523
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,808,184 B2
`IPR2014-00455, IPR2014-00456
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,811,421 B2
`IPR2014-00468, IPR2014-00470, IPR2014-00473
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
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
