`571.272.7822
`
` Paper No. 9
`
` Entered: January 10, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BLUEHOUSE GLOBAL LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SEMICONDUCTOR ENERGY LABORATORY CO., LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01362 (Patent 8,492,840 B2)
`Case IPR2018-01377 (Patent 9,281,405 B2)
`Case IPR2018-01382 (Patent 9,601,603 B2)
`Case IPR2018-01393 (Patent 9,293,545 B2)
`Case IPR2018-01405 (Patent 9,298,057 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, JEAN R. HOMERE, KEVIN TURNER, and
`STACEY G. WHITE, Administrative Patent Judges.1
`
`PER CURIAM.
`
`
`
`
`JUDGMENT
`Request for Adverse Judgment
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4)
`
`
`
`
`1 This is not a decision by an expanded panel of the Board; rather, this
`judgement addresses proceedings including of all listed judges.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01362 (Patent 8,492,840 B2)
`IPR2018-01377 (Patent 9,281,405 B2)
`IPR2018-01382 (Patent 9,601,603 B2)
`IPR2018-01393 (Patent 9,293,545 B2)
`IPR2018-01405 (Patent 9,298,057 B2)
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`On December 19, 2018, Petitioner BlueHouse sought authorization to
`terminate the pending proceedings in the above-referenced matters. Ex.
`3001.2 Upon further inquiry, Petitioner and Patent Owner (collectively
`referred to as “the Parties”) represented that Petitioner requests adverse
`judgment under 37 C.F.R. § 42.74 (b)(4) in each of the above identified
`proceedings and that Patent Owner does not oppose. Ex. 3002.
`On this record, we construe the parties’ email communications
`referenced above as unopposed Petitioner requests for entry of adverse
`judgment against Petitioner in the above-identified inter partes review
`proceedings. 37 C.F.R. § 42.74 (b)(4).
`These cases are in the preliminary proceeding stage; no institution of a
`trial has been made.3 Based on the facts of these cases, it is appropriate to
`enter judgment in each of the above-identified proceedings.4
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s requests for adverse judgment in the
`above-identified proceedings are granted;
` FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is herein entered against Petitioner
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we cite to the communication by Petitioner
`transmitted via email by the parties on December 19, 2018. Exhibit 3001 is
`representative of the separate electronic communications submitted by
`Petitioner in each of the above-identified proceedings.
`3 A preliminary proceeding begins with the filing of a petition for instituting
`a trial and ends with a decision as to whether a trial will be instituted. 37
`C.F.R. § 42.2.
`4 A judgment means a final written decision by the Board, or a termination
`of a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01362 (Patent 8,492,840 B2)
`IPR2018-01377 (Patent 9,281,405 B2)
`IPR2018-01382 (Patent 9,601,603 B2)
`IPR2018-01393 (Patent 9,293,545 B2)
`IPR2018-01405 (Patent 9,298,057 B2)
`
`
`in the above identified proceedings; and
` FURTHER ORDERED that the above-identified proceedings are
`terminated.
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Ryan O. White
`Roshan P Shrestha
`Philip R. Bautista
`TAFT, STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP
`rwhite@taftlaw.com
`rshrestha@taftlaw.com
`pbautista@taftlaw.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Roberto J. Devoto
`W. Karl Renner
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`devoto@fr.com
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`
`Eric Robinson
`Stephen P. Catlin
`ROBINSON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
`LAW OFFICE, P.C.
`erobison@riplo.com
`scatlin@riplo.com
`
`
`3
`
`