`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC., and
`LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A, INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v .
`
`CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP.,
`Patent Owner
`
`Case No. IPR2014-01302
`Patent 8,059,015 B2
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, PATRICK M. BOUCHER, and
`KEVIN W. CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDINGS
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72, Petitioners LG
`
`Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Electronics Mobilecomm
`
`U.S.A, Inc. (“LG”) and Patent Owner Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (“Cypress”),
`
`jointly request termination of Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2014-01302, which
`
`is directed to U.S. Patent No. 8,059,015 B2 (“the ‘015 Patent”).
`
`LG’s petition for this inter partes review was filed on August 15, 2014. The
`
`Office instituted review on February 9, 2015. Cypress’ Response was filed on
`
`May 12, 2015. No decision on the merits has yet issued. The parties have reached
`
`agreement to terminate this inter partes review. A copy of the agreement is
`
`attached as Exhibit 2021, and a joint motion to file the agreement as business
`
`confidential information is being filed concurrently herewith.
`
`Termination is proper under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a) because the parties are
`
`jointly requesting termination and the Office has not yet issued a decision on the
`
`merits in this matter. Accordingly, the parties are entitled to terminate this
`
`proceeding under Section 317(a) upon their joint request.
`
`The ‘015 Patent is the subject of the following pending litigation: Cypress
`
`Semiconductor Corp. v. LG Electronics, Inc., Case No. 4:13-cv-04034 (N.D. Cal.
`
`Aug. 29, 2013). The Parties filed a F.R.C.P. Rule 41 Stipulation to Dismiss the
`
`litigation, and the Court issued an order on July 28, 2015 dismissing Cypress’s
`
`claims with prejudice and LG’s counterclaims without prejudice. The ‘015 Patent
`
`1
`
`
`
`was previously the subject of Cypress Semiconductor Corp. v. BlackBerry Ltd.,
`
`Case No. 5:13-cv-04183 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 10, 2013),which was dismissed without
`
`prejudice on September 25, 2014.
`
`The parties jointly request termination of IPR2014-01302.
`
`Dated: July 31, 2015
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/Robert R. Laurenzi
`Robert R. Laurenzi
`Reg. No. 45,557
`
`Kaye Scholer LLP
`250 West 55th Street
`New York, NY 10019-9710
`Phone: 212-836-7235
`Facsimile: 212-836-6427
`Email: rlaurenzi@kayescholer.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
`
`By: /Jason M. Shapiro/
`Jason M. Shapiro
`Reg. No. 35,354
`
`ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST &
`MANBECK, P.C.
`607 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20005
`Phone: 202-783-6040
`
`2
`
`Dated: July 31, 2015
`
`
`
`Facsimile: 202-783-6031
`Email:
`jshapiro@rothwellfigg.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioners
`LG Electronics, Inc.,
`LG Electronics, U.S.A., Inc., and
`LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc.
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR §§ 42.6(e)(4) and 42.105(b), the undersigned certifies
`
`that on July 31, 2015, a complete and entire copy of this JOINT MOTION TO
`
`TERMINATE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317 was provided
`
`via email to the Petitioner by serving the correspondence email address of record
`
`as follows:
`
`Jason Shapiro
`Soumya Panda
`Brian A. Tollefson,
`ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK
`607 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`Email:
`
`jshapiro@rothwellfigg.com
`spanda@rothwellfigg.com
`btollefson@rothwellfigg.com
`
`By: /s/Robert R. Laurenzi
`Robert R. Laurenzi
`Kaye Scholer LLP
`250 West 55th Street
`New York, NY 10019-9710
`T: 212-836-7235
`
`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
