`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Date Entered: June 12, 2015
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC. and TWITTER, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SUMMIT 6, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00685
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`____________
`
`Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and
`KERRY BEGLEY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination Pursuant to Settlement
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5, 42.71, 42.73, 42.74
`
`
`On June 10, 2015, Petitioner (Apple, Inc. and Twitter, Inc.) and Patent
`Owner Summit 6 LLC (“Summit 6”) filed a Joint Motion to Terminate.
`Paper 15. Along with the motion, the parties filed a copy of their Settlement
`Agreements, made in connection with the termination of this case, in
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Exs. 1030 & 1031. The parties also
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00685
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`
`submitted a Joint Request That Settlement Agreements Be Treated as
`Business Confidential Information and Kept Separate Under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.74(c). Paper 16. For the reasons set forth below, the Joint Motion to
`Terminate and the Joint Request are granted.
`The Board generally expects that a case “will terminate after the filing
`of a settlement agreement, unless the Board has already decided the merits.”
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14,
`2012); see 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. In their Joint Motion to Terminate, the parties
`indicate that the Settlement Agreements resolve all disputes between them
`involving the patent-at-issue in this case, U.S. Patent No. 7,765,482 B2 (“the
`’482 patent”). See Paper 15 at 2. This case is in its initial phase. Summit 6
`filed a Preliminary Response on May 19, 2015, less than one month before
`the parties filed their joint Motion to Terminate. Paper 10. The Board has
`not determined whether to institute inter partes review pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`§ 314. Upon consideration of the facts before us, we determine that it is
`appropriate to terminate this case and enter judgment, without rendering
`either a decision to institute inter partes review or a final written decision.
`See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a), 42.71(a), 42.73(a), 42.74. We, therefore, grant the
`Joint Motion to Terminate. Paper 15.
`We also determine that the parties have complied with the
`requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) to have the Settlement Agreement
`treated as business confidential information and kept separate from the files
`of the ’482 patent. Thus, we grant the Joint Request That Settlement
`Agreements Be Treated as Business Confidential Information and Kept
`Separate Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 16.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00685
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`
`
`In addition, given the termination of the case as a result of the parties’
`settlement, we also dismiss as moot the pending Motion to Seal, filed by
`Summit 6. Paper 14. The subject papers of the Motion to Seal,
`Exhibits 2001, 2002, 2020, 2021, and 2033, are expunged from the record.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`ORDERED that the Joint Request that Settlement Agreements Be
`Treated as Business Confidential Information and Kept Separate Under
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 16) is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Summit 6’s Motion to Seal (Paper 14) is
`dismissed as moot;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits 2001, 2002, 2020, 2021, and
`2033 are expunged; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate (Paper 15)
`is granted and this case is hereby terminated.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00685
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`For Petitioner:
`Jason Eisenberg
`Shouvik Biswas
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX
`Jasone-ptab@skgf.com
`sbiswas-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`For Patent Owner:
`
`Peter J. Ayers
`John Shumaker
`Brian Mangum
`LEE & HAYES, PLLC
`peter@leehayes.com
`jshumaker@leehayes.com
`brianm@leehayes.com
`
`4