`
`571-272-7822
`Date Entered: September 28, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ATI TECHNOLOGIES ULC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01225
`Patent 8,760,454 B2
`Case IPR2017-01226
`Patent 9,582,846 B21
`____________
`
`Before, JONI Y. CHANG, BRIAN J. MCNAMARA, and
`JAMES B. ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judges
`
`McNAMARA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER AUTHORIZING FILING OF MOTION TO TERMINATE
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This order is to be filed in each case. The parties are not authorized to use
`this style heading in any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01225; IPR2017-01226
`Patent 8,760,454 B2; 9,582,846 B2
`
`
`In e-mail correspondence on September 26, 2017, the parties advised
`the Board that a settlement agreement had been reached in the preliminary
`inter partes review proceedings before the office concerning of U.S. Patent
`No. 8,760,454 B2 and U.S. Patent No. 9,582,846 B2 (the subject patents).
`The parties may agree to settle any issue in a proceeding pursuant to a
`written agreement, a copy of which shall be filed with the Board before
`termination of the trial. 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(a)-(b). Any agreement or
`understanding between the patent owner and a petitioner, including any
`collateral agreements referred to in such agreement or understanding made
`in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination shall be in
`writing and a true copy of such agreement or understanding shall be filed in
`the Office before the termination of such proceeding as between the parties.
`See 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). Any such agreement should be filed as a separate
`exhibit available to the Board and parties only.
`These matters are in the preliminary stage. Patent Owner filed a
`Preliminary Response in each proceeding on July 18, 2017, but we have not
`rendered a decision whether to institute a trial. The parties have identified
`co-pending litigation, which they represent they have stayed pending
`settlement, as to Petitioner and Patent Owner. The parties have identified no
`other related matters. Under these circumstances, it may be appropriate to
`enter judgment and terminate the proceeding without rendering a final
`written decision. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`The parties are authorized to file a Joint Motion To Terminate each
`proceeding. The Joint Motion To Terminate must update the Board
`concerning the status of any litigation or proceeding, including, but not
`limited to proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, involving
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01225; IPR2017-01226
`Patent 8,760,454 B2; 9,582,846 B2
`
`
`the subject patents, and advise the Board whether any litigation or
`proceeding involving the subject patents is contemplated in the foreseeable
`future. The Joint Motion To Terminate also must include a copy of any
`agreement and include a statement certifying that there are no collateral
`agreements or understandings made in connection with, or in contemplation
`of, the termination of these proceedings. A party to a settlement may request
`that any written agreement be treated as business confidential information
`and be kept separate from the files of an involved patent. 35 U.S.C.
`§ 317(b); 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). The request must be filed with the
`settlement. Id.
`It is ORDERED that the parties are authorized to file a Joint Motion
`To Terminate the proceeding and a Joint Request That The Settlement
`Agreement Be Treated As Business Confidential Information.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01225; IPR2017-01226
`Patent 8,760,454 B2; 9,582,846 B2
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Robert Pluta
`Amanda Streff
`Bryan Nese
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`rpluta@mayerbrown.com
`astreff@mayerbrown.com
`bnese@mayerbrown.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`William Meunier
`Michael Renaud
`Adam Rizk
`MINTZ, LEVIN, COHEN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C.
`wameunier@mintz.com
`mtrenaud@mintz.com
`arizk@mintz.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
