`571.272.7822
`
`
`Paper No. 11
`
` Entered: June 11, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GOOGLE INC., HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SUMMIT 6 LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00806
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and
`KERRY BEGLEY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BEGLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Joint Motion to Terminate Involvement of the HTC Entities;
`Joint Motion to File Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential
`Information
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5, 42.71, 42.74
`
`
`On June 9, 2015, Petitioners HTC Corporation and
`HTC America, Inc. (collectively, “HTC Entities”) and Patent Owner
`Summit 6 LLC (“Summit 6”) filed a Joint Motion to Terminate Involvement
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00806
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`of the HTC Entities (“Joint Motion to Terminate”). Paper 9. The Joint
`Motion to Terminate requests that we terminate the HTC Entities from this
`case because the HTC Entities and Summit 6 have entered into a Settlement
`Agreement. Id. Along with the motion, the parties filed a copy of their
`Settlement Agreement in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Ex. 1015.
`The parties also submitted a Joint Motion to File Settlement Agreement as
`Business Confidential Information Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper
`10. For the reasons set forth below, both motions are granted.
`In their Joint Motion to Terminate, the HTC Entities and Summit 6
`indicate that their Settlement Agreement resolves 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 9, at 1. In addition, the motion points out that this
`case is in its initial phase. Id. Summit 6 has not filed a Preliminary
`Response to the Petition. The Board also 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 the HTC Entities’ involvement in this case and to
`dismiss the HTC Entities as parties to the case. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a),
`42.71(a), 42.74; Paper 9, at 1–2. We note that the termination of the HTC
`Entities’ involvement in this case does not terminate the case, because
`Google Inc. remains as a petitioner. See Paper 9, at 1.
`Turning to the Joint Motion to File Settlement Agreement as Business
`Confidential Information Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), we determine
`that the HTC Entities and Summit 6 have complied with the requirements of
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) to have their Settlement Agreement treated as business
`confidential information and kept separate from the files of the ’482 patent.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00806
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`
`ORDER
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate Involvement of the
`HTC Entities (Paper 9) is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the case continues with Google Inc. as
`the petitioner;
`FURTHER ORDERED that any subsequent papers filed in this case
`should not include HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in the caption;
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to File Settlement
`Agreement as Business Confidential Information (Paper 10) is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00806
`Patent 7,765,482 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`John Alemanni
`Michael Morlock
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`jalemanni@kilpatricktownsend.com
`mmorlock@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Peter Ayers
`John Shumaker
`Brian Mangum
`Lee & Hayes, PLLC
`peter@leehayes.com
`jshumaker@leehayes.com
`brianm@leehayes.com
`
`
`
`4