`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper No. 7
`Entered: March 2, 2020
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SLING TV L.L.C., SLING MEDIA, L.L.C.,
`DISH NETWORK L.L.C., DISH TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2019-01589
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KEVIN W. CHERRY, GARTH D. BAER, and
`NABEEL U. KHAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`CHERRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Denying Motion for Joinder
`Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review
`37 C.F.R. § 42.122(b); 35 U.S.C. § 314
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01589
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`On September 6, 2019, Sling TV L.L.C., Sling Media L.L.C., DISH
`Network L.L.C., and DISH Technologies L.L.C. (“Petitioner” or “DISH”)
`filed a Petition (Paper 2, “Pet.”) seeking inter partes review of claim 1–6, 8–
`12, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,934,535 B2. The Petition was accompanied
`by a motion seeking joinder with IPR2019-00748 filed by Google, LLC
`(“Google”). Paper 3 (“Motion”). We deny Petitioner’s Motion for Joinder
`because, as explained below, IPR2019-00748 has now been terminated.
`Because we do not join Petitioner as a party to IPR2019-00748, the Petition
`is barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b).
`
`I. ANALYSIS
`On August 13, 2019, we instituted inter partes review in IPR2019-
`00748 and joined Google as a party to IPR2018-01342. See IPR2018-
`01342, Paper 24. For the reasons explained in our Order Granting-in-Part
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Terminate in IPR2018-01342, DISH’s petition
`was time barred, and thus we terminated that proceeding as to DISH. See
`IPR2018-01342, Paper 45, 8. We then proceeded to a Final Written
`Decision in IPR2019-00748 and IPR2019-00760 using IPR2018-01342 as
`the consolidated docket for the two proceedings. See IPR2018-01342,
`Paper 47.
`Because IPR2019-00748 has terminated in a Final Written Decision
`and no proceeding remains for Petitioner to join, we deny Petitioner’s
`motion to join IPR2019-00748.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), an inter partes review “may not be
`instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year
`after the date on which ... the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging
`infringement of the patent.” 35 U.S.C. § 315(b); see also 37 C.F.R.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01589
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`§ 42.101(b). Because Petitioner was served with a complaint asserting
`infringement of the ’535 patent more than one year before it filed the
`Petition, Pet. 5, we deny the Petition as barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b).
`
`II. ORDER
`For the reasons given, it is:
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Joinder (Paper 3) is denied;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for inter partes review is
`denied.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01589
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Ruffin Cordell
`Adman Shartzer
`Brian Livedalen
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`cordell@fr.com
`shartzer@fr.com
`bvl@fr.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Philip X. Wang
`C. Jay Chung
`Neil Rubin
`Kent Shum
`Reza Mirzaie
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`pwang@raklaw.com
`jchung@raklaw.com
`nrubin@raklaw.com
`kshum@raklaw.com
`rmirzaie@raklaw.com
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`