`Tel: 571.272.7822
`
`Paper 8
`Entered: November 29, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`TRACBEAM, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2018-01723
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`
`Before DAVID C. McKONE, JAMES A. TARTAL, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`TARTAL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Joint Motion to Dismiss Petition
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.71(a), 42.72, 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01723
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition (Paper 2) seeking
`institution of inter partes review of claims 25 and 26 of U.S. Patent
`No. 7,525,484 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the challenged patent”). Petitioner
`subsequently informed the Board that it had reached an agreement with
`Patent Owner TracBeam, LLC, to settle this proceeding and sought
`authorization to file a joint motion to dismiss this proceeding. With our
`authorization, the Parties filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss the Petition.
`Paper 6. A copy of the Settlement Agreement executed by the Parties was
`filed along with the Joint Motion to Dismiss. Ex. 1018. The Parties also
`filed a Joint Request to Treat Settlement Agreement as Business
`Confidential Information Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b). Paper 7.
`The Parties represent that they have settled their dispute with respect
`to the challenged patent and memorialized their settlement in the written
`agreement. Paper 6. This proceeding is at an early stage. Patent Owner has
`not yet submitted a Preliminary Response, we have not considered the merits
`of the Petition, and we have not yet instituted a trial.
`In view of the early stage of this proceeding, the Parties’
`representations, and the concurrent settlement of the district court lawsuit,
`we determine that it is appropriate to dismiss the Petition and terminate the
`proceeding. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(a). Therefore, the Joint Motion to
`Dismiss the Petition is granted. We also grant the request of the Parties to
`treat the Settlement Agreement as business confidential information. This
`paper does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01723
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons, it is:
`ORDERED that the Joint Request to Treat Settlement Agreement as
`Business Confidential Information Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) is
`granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1018)
`shall be treated as business confidential information and shall be kept
`separate from the patent file; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Dismiss the Petition
`is granted and the proceeding is dismissed.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01723
`Patent 7,525,484 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David L. McCombs
`Theodore M. Foster
`Dina Blikshteyn
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`ipr.theo.foster@haynesboone.com
`dina.blikshteyn.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Sean Luner
`DOVEL AND LUNER, LLP
`sean@dovel.com
`
`Steven Sereboff
`SOCAL IP LAW GROUP LLP
`ssereboff@socalip.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`