`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`Robert Bosch LLC
` Petitioner
`v.
`Monument Peak Ventures LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019- 01473
`U. S. Patent No. 6,654,507
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDINGS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-01473
`Patent No. 6,654,507
`
`I.
`
`PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), Petitioner Robert Bosch LLC and Patent Owner
`
`Monument Peak Ventures LLC jointly request that this inter partes review
`
`proceeding involving U.S. Patent No. 6,654,507 (“the ’507 patent”) be terminated
`
`based on a settlement between Petitioner and Patent Owner (“the Parties”).
`
`II. REASONS FOR GRANTING THE MOTION
`
`Generally, the Board expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing
`
`of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`
`48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). The Board authorized filing of the instant motion
`
`on August 25, 2020. Guidance as to the content of a motion to terminate is provided
`
`in IPR2013-00428, Paper No. 56. There, the Board indicated that a joint motion,
`
`such as this one, should (a) include a brief explanation as to why termination is
`
`appropriate; (b) identify all parties in any related litigation involving the patent at
`
`issue; (c) identify any related proceedings currently before the Office; and (d)
`
`discuss specifically the current status of each such related litigation or proceeding
`
`with respect to each party to the litigation or proceeding. Id. at 2. This motion
`
`satisfies each of the above requirements and is accompanied by the Parties’
`
`settlement agreement, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 35 C.F.R. § 42.74 (b).
`
`a. Brief Explanation of Why Termination is Appropriate
`
`Termination is appropriate because briefing by the Parties is not yet complete,
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-01473
`Patent No. 6,654,507
`oral argument has not been held, the Board has not decided the merits of the
`
`proceeding, and a final written decision has not been issued. The Parties have
`
`resolved their disputes and executed a settlement agreement to request termination
`
`of this proceeding and dismissal of the Parties’ related proceeding regarding the ’507
`
`patent in Monument Peak Ventures, LLC v. Bosch Security Systems, LLC et al.
`
`Pursuant to the Parties’ settlement agreement, the Parties have jointly moved to
`
`dismiss the litigation.
`
`b. All Parties in Any Pending Related Litigation Involving the Patent at
`Issue
`
`The following litigations are related to the ’507 patent:
`
`Monument Peak Ventures, LLC v. Bosch Security Systems, LLC et al., Case
`
`No. 1:20-cv-00611-MN (D. Del.) (joint motion to dismiss filed August 19,
`
`2020)
`
`c. Related Proceedings Currently Before the Office
`
`This proceeding is related to the following proceedings, in each of which the
`
`Parties have filed or are filing concurrent joint motions to terminate:
`
`1. IPR2019-01472, involving U.S. Patent No. 6,282,317, instituted on
`
`March 09, 2020;
`
`2. IPR2019-01474, involving U.S. Patent No. 6,654,506, instituted on
`
`March 09, 2020;
`
`3. IPR2019-01475, involving U.S. Patent No. 7,035,461, instituted on
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`March 23, 2020; and
`
`4. IPR2019-01476, involving U.S. Patent No. 7,148,908, instituted on
`
`Case IPR2019-01473
`Patent No. 6,654,507
`
`March 23, 2020.
`
`d. Current Status of Each Such Related Litigation of Proceeding With
`Respect to Each Party in the Litigation or Proceeding
`
`Sections II.b and II.c above indicate the status of each related litigation or
`
`proceeding with respect to each party to the litigation or proceeding.
`
`III. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b), the Parties’
`
`settlement agreement is in writing, and a true and correct copy is being filed
`
`concurrently herewith as Exhibit 1012.1 There are no other agreements, oral or
`
`written, between the parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the
`
`termination of these proceedings. The parties are also filing concurrently herewith a
`
`joint request under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) to treat the
`
`settlement agreement as business confidential information and keep it separate from
`
`the files of the ’507 patent.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`For all these reasons, the Parties respectfully request termination of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`
`1 The settlement agreement is being filed via PTAB E2E with access to the “Parties
`and Board only.”
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-01473
`Patent No. 6,654,507
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/Tarek N. Fahmi/
` Tarek N. Fahmi
`Reg. No. 41,402
`
`Ascenda Law Group, PC
`2150 N First Street, Suite 420
`San Jose, CA 95131
`
`Tel: 866-877-4883
`Email: tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 26, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`/Lionel M. Lavenue/
`
`Lionel M. Lavenue
`Reg. No. 46,859
`
`
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON,
`FARABOW, GARRETT &
`DUNNER, LLP
`Two Freedom Square
`1955 Freedom Drive
`Reston, VA 20190
`
`Tel: 571-203-2750
`Email:
`lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing JOINT
`
`MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDINGS was served on August 26, 2020,
`
`via email directed to counsel of record for the Patent Owner at the following:
`
`
`Tarek N. Fahmi (Reg. No. 41,402)
`tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`
`Jonathan Tsao (Reg. No. 61,241)
`jonathan.tsao@ascendalaw.com
`
`patents@ascendalaw.com
`
`Ascenda Law Group, PC
`2150 N First St., Suite 420
`San Jose, CA 95131
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` By:/Daniel E. Doku/
`Daniel E. Doku
`Litigation Clerk
`
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
`Garret & Dunner, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 26, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`