` Entered: November 24, 2015
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.,
`HONDA OF AMERCIA MFG., INC.,
`HONDA PATENTS & TECHNOLOGIES NORTH AMERICA, LLC, and
`HONDA MOTOR CO., LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SIGNAL IP, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01005
`Patent 6,434,486 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JOSIAH C. COCKS, MITCHELL G. WEATHERLY, and
`CHARLES J. BOUDREAU, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BOUDREAU, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT AND FINAL WRITTEN DECISION
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.73
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01005
`Patent 6,434,486 B1
`
`
`I. BACKGROUND
`The Board instituted inter partes review of claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14,
`21, 22, 26–29, 33, and 34 of U.S. Patent No. 6,434,486 B1 (“the ’486
`patent”) on September 18, 2015. Paper 8. On November 11, 2015, Signal
`IP, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) filed Patent Owner’s Second Updated Mandatory
`Notices pursuant to 37 C.F.R § 42.8(a)(2). Paper 11 (“Updated Notices”).
`In its Updated Notices, Patent Owner indicates that: (1) Reexamination
`Certificate US 6,434,486 C1 issued on November 6, 2015, cancelling claims
`21, 26, and 28 of the ’486 patent and adding new claims 41–77; (2) Patent
`Owner filed a statutory disclaimer with respect to claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14,
`22, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, and 35 of the ’486 patent on November 10, 2015;
`and (3) accordingly, there are no claims for which trial was instituted
`remaining in the ’486 patent. Paper 11, 2.1
`
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`A party may request judgment against itself at any time during a
`proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Under the Rules, actions construed as a
`request for entry of adverse judgment include “[c]ancellation or disclaimer
`of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial.” 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.73(b)(2). Here, claims 21, 26, and 28 of the ’486 patent were cancelled
`in Reexamination Certificate US 6,434,486 C1 (Ex. 2004), and Patent
`Owner subsequently disclaimed, under 37 C.F.R. § 1.321, claims 1, 2, 6–9,
`13, 14, 22, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, and 35 of the ’486 patent (Ex. 2005).
`
`1 Patent Owner filed copies of the reexamination certificate and statutory
`disclaimer referenced in its Updated Notices as Exhibits 2004 and 2005,
`respectively. Paper 11, 2.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01005
`Patent 6,434,486 B1
`
`Because Patent Owner disclaimed, inter alia, claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14, 22,
`27, 29, 33, and 34 of the ’486 patent, constituting all of the claims involved
`in this trial that had not already been cancelled in the reexamination
`certificate, we construe Patent Owner’s statutory disclaimer as a request for
`entry of adverse judgment.
`
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`Having reviewed Reexamination Certificate US 6,434,486 C1 and
`Patent Owner’s statutory disclaimer with respect to claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14,
`22, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, and 35 of the ’486 patent, we determine that entry
`of judgment against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14,
`21, 22, 26–29, 33, and 34 of the ’486 patent is appropriate.
`
`
`IV. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered under 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.73(b) against Patent Owner with respect to claims 1, 2, 6–9, 13, 14, 21,
`22, 26–29, 33, and 34 of the ’486 patent; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that this constitutes a final written decision
`under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01005
`Patent 6,434,486 B1
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Joshua A. Griswold
`Daniel Smith
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`griswold@fr.com
`IPR15625-0021IP1@fr.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Tarek N. Fahmi
`Holly J. Atkinson
`Ascenda Law Group, PC
`tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`holly.atkinson@ascendalaw.com
`patents@ascendalaw.com
`
`
`
`
`4