`Filed: May 26, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`________________
`
`IPR2015-00829
`Patent 6,886,956
`
`________________
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDING
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`IPR2015-00829
` U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`
`
`Petitioner Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) and Patent Owner Innovative
`
`Display Technologies LLC (IDT) have entered into a settlement agreement that
`
`resolves all underlying disputes between the parties, including the inter partes
`
`review proceeding IPR2015-00829, against U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956, currently
`
`before the Board.
`
`The Board authorized the parties to file a joint motion to terminate this
`
`proceeding in a hearing held on May 22, 2015. Accordingly, the parties jointly
`
`move to terminate this proceeding pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.74.
`
`The Board requested that the parties briefly explain why termination is
`
`appropriate and provide the Board with a status update of any other matters
`
`involving the ’956 Patent. The Board also requested submission of a true copy of
`
`the parties’ agreement. The Parties consider the agreement Highly Confidential
`
`Business Information. During the hearing on May 22, 2015, the Board also
`
`authorized filing of a motion to hold the agreement confidential pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.74(c).
`
`THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
`
`The parties have entered into a Confidential Settlement Agreement (the
`
`“Agreement”) settling their dispute involving eight (8) U.S. Patents, including U.S.
`
`–1–
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`IPR2015-00829
`
`Patent No. 6,886,956. The parties are filing a copy of the Agreement with this
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding in IPR2015-00829, as Exhibit 1014. In
`
`addition, the parties have filed a request to treat the Agreement as Confidential
`
`Business Information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). As part of the Agreement, the
`
`related district court litigation, Innovative Display Technologies LLC v. Toyota
`
`Motor Co1p., Case No. 2: 14—cv—200—JRG (ED TX.) has been dismissed. (Exhibit
`
`1015).
`
`The parties also agreed to jointly request termination of all pending inter
`
`partes reviews filed by Petitioner Toyota against patents owned by IDT.
`
`STATUS OF RELATED PROCEEDINGS
`
`A. District Court Proceeding
`
`The following is the only related proceeding between the parties:
`
`Innovative Display
`Technologies LLC v.
`Toyota Motor Corp. Inc.,
`Case No. 2: l4-cv-200-
`
`JRG (ED TX.)
`
`20 1 5 .
`
`“-5- Pa*e"*N°s~T
`6,508,563
`Unopposed motion to dismiss
`5,385,955
`without prejudice filed May 19,
`7=434=974
`2015 and Dismissal Order
`8,215,816
`entered May 20,
`
`7,384,177
`
`7,300,194
`
`7,404,660
`
`6,755,547
`
`There are no other district court proceedings related to U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,886,956 between the parties.
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`IPR2015-00829
`
`B. United States Patent Oflice Proceedings
`
`The following related inter partes review proceedings filed by Petitioner
`
`Toyota are currently before the United States Patent and Trademark Office:
`
`As noted above, the parties have concurrently filed joint requests to
`
`terminate each of the above inter partes reviews.
`
`C. Foreign Proceedings
`
`There are no foreign proceedings related to U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`between the parties.
`
`WHY TERMINATION IS APPROPRIATE
`
`Termination of this proceeding is appropriate at this stage in the proceeding
`
`in view of the Agreement. The Agreement ends all patent disputes between the
`
`_3_
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`parties, including this proceeding. Moreover, as shown above, the Agreement
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00829
` U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`resulted in the dismissal of the underlying civil action.
`
`Both Congress and the federal courts have expressed a strong interest in
`
`encouraging settlement in litigation. See, e.g., Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. August, 450
`
`U.S. 346, 352 (1981) (“The purpose of [Fed. R. Civ. P.] 68 is to encourage the
`
`settlement of litigation.”); Bergh v. Dept. of Transp., 794 F.2d 1575, 1577 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 1986) (“The law favors settlement of cases.”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 950
`
`(1986). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also places a particularly
`
`strong emphasis on settlement. See Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. U.S., 806 F.2d
`
`1046, 1050 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (noting that the law favors settlement to reduce
`
`antagonism and hostility between parties). Moreover, the Board generally expects
`
`that a proceeding will terminate after the filing of a settlement. See, e.g., Office
`
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 46,768 (Aug. 14, 2012).
`
`Maintaining this proceeding after Petitioner Toyota’s settlement with Patent
`
`Owner IDT would discourage future settlements by removing a primary motivation
`
`for settlement: eliminating litigation risk by resolving the parties’ disputes and
`
`ending the pending proceedings between them. For patent owners, litigation risks
`
`include the potential for an invalidity ruling against their patents. If a patent owner
`
`knows that an inter partes review will likely continue regardless of settlement, it
`
`creates a strong disincentive for the patent owner to settle.
`
`
`
`–4–
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`
`Additionally, it would not be appropriate for the Board to proceed to a final
`
`IPR2015-00829
` U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`
`
`written decision under Section 318(a) in this case. The Board has not instituted
`
`trial and IDT has not filed a Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response. Therefore, this
`
`proceeding is unripe for a final written decision.
`
`
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner Toyota and the Patent Owner IDT
`
`jointly and respectfully request that the Board terminate this proceeding in its
`
`entirety.
`
`Date: 05/26/2015
`
`
`Date: 05/26/2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/Thomas W. Winland
`
`
`
`Thomas W. Winland, Reg. No. 27,605
`P. Andrew Riley, Reg. No. 66,290
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
` Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Ave, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner
`Toyota Motor Corporation
`
`
`/George W. Webb/
`
`
`
` George W. Webb, Reg. No. 60,797
`Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi
` & Mensing P.C.
`1221 Mc Kinney, Suite 3460
`Houston, TX 77010
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`Innovative Display Technologies LLC
`
`
`
`–5–
`
`
`
`Joint Motion to Terminate Proceeding
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`IPR2015-00829
` U.S. Patent No. 6,886,956
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies a copy of the foregoing JOINT MOTION TO
`
`TERMINATE IPR2015-00829 was served on May 26, 2015 via electronic mail
`
`directed to the counsel of record for the Patent Owner at the following:
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 26, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`George W. Webb, Lead Counsel
`Registration No. 60,737
`gwebb@azalaw.com
`
`Amir Alavi
`aalavi@azalaw.com
`
`Brian Simmons
`bsimmons@azalaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Bradley J. Moore/
`Bradley J. Moore
`Litigation Clerk
`
`
`
`
`
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON,
`FARABOW, GARRETT &
`DUNNER LLP
`
`
`
`–6–