`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`GODO KAISHA IP BRIDGE 1,
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR2017-00753
`U.S. Patent No. 6,538,324
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION
`FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark
`Office P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion to Dismiss Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-00753
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The Board authorized Petitioner GlobalFoundries, Inc. (“Global”) to file a
`
`motion to dismiss the petition for IPR2017-00753 regarding U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,538,324 (“the ’324 patent”) in an Order issued on February 23, 2017. Global now
`
`so moves. IPR2017-00753 is in its preliminary phase. Patent Owner Godo Kaisha
`
`IP Bridge 1 (“IP Bridge”) has not yet filed a Preliminary Response and the Board
`
`has yet to reach the merits and issue a decision on institution. Global has filed a
`
`new petition for IPR2017-00919 that includes the same invalidity challenges as the
`
`petition for IPR2017-00753, but also includes a second real party-in-interest
`
`GlobalFoundries U.S. Inc. Therefore, Global requests the Board to dismiss the
`
`petition for IPR2017-00753, as the same invalidity challenges are included in the
`
`petition for IPR2017-00919, to preserve the Board’s and parties’ resources and to
`
`achieve a just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution to this dispute. Furthermore,
`
`counsel for Petitioner has conferred with counsel for Patent Owner, and Patent
`
`Owner does not oppose the relief sought by this Motion.
`
`II.
`
`FACTS
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`IP Bridge is the owner of the ‘324 Patent.
`
`On January 23, 2017, Global filed a petition for inter partes review of
`
`claims 1-3, 5-7, and 9 of the ‘324 Patent (IPR2017-00753). The petition, being
`
`assigned IPR2017-00753, includes the same invalidity challenges as in IPR2016-
`
`01249. The Petitioner also concurrently filed a motion for joinder of IPR2017-00753
`2
`
`
`
`
`Motion to Dismiss Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-00753
`
`
`with IPR2016-01249. IPR2017-00753 was filed with GlobalFoundries, Inc. as the
`
`real party-in-interest. See IPR2017-00753, Petition, p. 34.
`
`3.
`
`On February 16, 2017, Global filed a new petition for inter partes
`
`review of the ‘324 Patent including the same invalidity challenges as in IPR2017-
`
`00753, but with a second real party-in-interest GlobalFoundries U.S. Inc. (designated
`
`IPR2017-00919). The petition for IPR2017-00919 indicated the Petitioner’s intent to
`
`withdraw IPR2017-00753. See IPR2017-00919, Petition, p. 34, Footnote 13.
`
`4.
`
`The petition in IPR2017-00919 presents the same invalidity challenges
`
`and relies on the same evidence as the petition in IPR2017-00753.
`
`5.
`
`On February 21, 2017, counsel for the Patent Owner requested a
`
`conference call with the Board. On February 22, 2017, the Board held a conference
`
`call with the Petitioner and Patent Owner regarding IPR2017-00753, IPR2017-00757,
`
`IPR2017-00919, and IPR2017-00920 (pursuant to the ‘324 Patent) and IPR2017-
`
`00849, IPR2017-00850, IPR2017-00925, and IPR2017-00926 (pursuant to U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,126,174). During the call, the Patent Owner requested an extension of
`
`time to file any oppositions to the motion for joinder and mandatory disclosures for
`
`IPR2017-00753. The Petitioner had no objection to extending the deadlines for Patent
`
`Owner’s oppositions to the motion for joinder. The Petitioner sought authorization to
`
`file motions to dismiss the original petitions once the new petitions were accorded
`
`filing dates. The Patent Owner had no objections to Petitioner filing motions to
`
`dismiss. See IPR2017-00753, Order, Paper 12 at p. 2.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion to Dismiss Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-00753
`6.
`On February 23, 2017, the Board issued an Order authorizing the
`
`Petitioner to file a motion to dismiss the petition in each of the original cases
`
`according to 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(a) within one week of notice according a filing date
`
`for the new petitions. See IPR2017-00753, Order, Paper 12.
`
`7.
`
`On February 23, 2017, the PTAB accorded a filing date for IPR2017-
`
`00919. See IPR2017-00919, Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petitioner, Paper 5.
`
`
`
`
`
`III. STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Good cause exists to dismiss Global’s petition in IPR2017-00753. Dismissal
`
`would preserve the Board’s and the parties’ resources, and would expeditiously
`
`resolve Global’s request, furthering the purpose of IPR challenges. 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.1(b). IPR2017-00753 is in its preliminary stage as the Board has not yet
`
`reached the merits and issued a decision on institution. IP Bridge would not be
`
`prejudiced by dismissal.
`
`The Board “may take up petitions or motions for decisions in any order, may
`
`grant, deny, or dismiss any petition or motion, and may enter any appropriate order.”
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.71 (a). The Rules governing IPR proceedings “shall be construed
`
`to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of every proceeding.” 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.1(b). The Board has previously granted motions to dismiss using its
`
`authority under at least 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5(a) and 42.71(a). See, e.g., Samsung
`
`Electronics Co. LTD v. Nvidia Corporation, IPR2015-01270, Paper 11 at p. 3
`
`(PTAB Dec. 9, 2015) (“Nonetheless, the rules provide us the discretion to ‘take up
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion to Dismiss Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-00753
`petitions or motions for decisions in any order’ and to ‘grant, deny, or dismiss any
`
`petition or motion’ or enter any appropriate order.”).
`
`Given that the petition in IPR2017-00919 includes the same challenges and
`
`relies on the same evidence as the petition in IPR2017-00753, the Board should
`
`grant Global’s motion because dismissal would further the purpose of the rules by
`
`justly and expeditiously resolving this dispute without subjecting the Board and the
`
`parties to unnecessary expense involved in further proceedings related to IPR2017-
`
`00753. Dismissal is also a just resolution, as IP Bridge will not be prejudiced by
`
`this Board dismissing IPR2017-00753, but rather will reap the benefit of preserving
`
`its own resources.
`
`
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`The Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board dismiss the petition and
`
`terminate proceedings for IPR2017-00753.
`
`
`
`Date: March 1, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
` /Christopher Carroll/
`Christopher Carroll
`White & Case LLP
`75 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109-1814
`Telephone: (617) 979-9342
`Facsimile: (617) 439-6702
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing Petitioner’s
`
`Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Petition for Inter Partes Review was served on
`
`March 1, 2017, via email directed to counsel of record for the Patent Owner at the
`
`following:
`
`Ngreenblum@gbpatent.com
`MFink@gbpatent.com
`Aturk@gbpatent.com
`
`/Christopher Carroll/
`White & Case LLP
`75 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109-1814
`Telephone: (617) 979-9342
`Facsimile: (617) 439-6702
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`