`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 35
`Entered: June 22, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`VIPTELA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FATPIPE NETWORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00684
`Patent 6,775,235 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before STACEY G. WHITE, MICHELLE N. WORMMEESTER, and
`JOHN F. HORVATH, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`WORMMEESTER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Joint Motion to Terminate
`37 C.F.R. §42.72
`and
`Granting Request to Treat Settlement Document
`as Business Confidential Information
`37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00684
`Patent 6,775,235 B2
`
`
`On June 15, 2018, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate the
`instant proceeding pursuant to a settlement agreement. Paper 33. The
`parties also filed a copy of their settlement agreement, made in connection
`with the termination of the instant proceeding. Ex. 1021. The parties
`represent that Exhibit 1021 is “a true and correct copy” of their settlement
`agreement, and that “[t]here are no collateral agreements or understandings
`made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of this
`proceeding.” Paper 33. In a concurrently filed paper, the parties jointly
`request that the settlement agreement be treated as confidential and separate
`from the file of the involved patent under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.74. Paper 34. We authorized the filing of these papers in an e-mail
`sent on June 14, 2018.
`On July 14, 2017, we entered a Decision to Institute an inter partes
`review in this case. Paper 8. Because we did not institute as to all
`challenged claims and all grounds presented in the Petition, we modified our
`Decision on May 9, 2018, to include review of all challenged claims and all
`grounds presented in the Petition. Paper 26; see SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu,
`138 S. Ct. 1348, 1359–60 (2018) (holding that a decision to institute under
`35 U.S.C. § 314 may not institute on less than all claims challenged in the
`petition). Although we have held an oral hearing as to the originally
`instituted claims and grounds, we have not yet held an oral hearing as to any
`newly instituted claim or challenge. Nor have we decided the merits of the
`proceeding. Based on these facts, it is appropriate to terminate the
`proceeding in view of the parties’ settlement. Thus, the parties’ joint motion
`to terminate the proceeding is granted.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00684
`Patent 6,775,235 B2
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that the parties’ joint motion to terminate the instant
`proceeding is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint request that the
`settlement agreement (Ex. 1021) be treated as business confidential
`information and kept separate from the patent file, under the provisions of
`35 U.S.C. §317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), is granted.
`
`PETITIONER:
`Robert C. Hilton
`George B. Davis
`MCGUIREWOODS LLP
`rhilton@mcguirewoods.com
`gdavis@mcguirewoods.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Robert C. Mattson
`Thomas C. Yebernetsky
`OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER
`& NEUSTADT, LLP
`CPDocketMattson@oblon.com
`CPDocketYebernetsky@oblon.com
`
`3
`
`
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
