`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 10
`Date: October 13, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`RESMAN, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`KARYA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2021-00844
`Patent 7,636,687 B2
`
`
`
`
`Beforee MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, and
`FRANCES L. IPPOLITO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Dismissal Prior to Institution of Trial
`35 U.S.C. § 314
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00844
`Patent 7,636,687 B2
`
`I. DISCUSSION
`On April 28, 2021, Resman, LLC (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition
`requesting an inter partes review of claims 1–21 of U.S. Patent No.
`7,636,687 B2 (“the ’687 patent”). Paper 3. On August 16, 2021, Karya
`Property Management, LLC, (“Patent Owner”) filed a Preliminary
`Response. Paper 7. A decision on whether to institute an inter partes
`review in this case has not yet been made.
`On September 2, 2021, the Parties filed an authorized Petitioner and
`Patent Owner’s Joint Motion to Terminate Inter Partes Review Proceeding
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 (“Joint Motion to Terminate”). Paper 8. The
`Parties also filed a Joint Request to File Settlement Agreement as Business
`Confidential Information Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317. Paper 9.
`In the Joint Motion to Terminate, the Parties state that termination is
`appropriate because they have settled all disputes between them relating to
`the ’687 patent. Paper 8, 2. The Parties also state that they have entered into
`a mutual release, and the only pending litigation matter involving the
`validity of the claims of the ’687 patent has been dismissed with prejudice at
`the Parties’ request. Id. at 2–3. The Parties also represent that “there are no
`other agreements, oral or written, between the Parties made in connection
`with, or in contemplation of, the termination of these proceedings.” Id. at 3.
`This proceeding is at an early stage, and we have not yet considered
`the IPR2021-00844 Petition’s merits, nor have we instituted a trial. In view
`of the early stage of this proceeding, we determine it is appropriate to
`dismiss the Petition and terminate the proceeding to promote efficiency and
`minimize unnecessary costs. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(a). Therefore, the
`Parties’ Joint Motion is granted.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00844
`Patent 7,636,687 B2
`The Parties also filed a Joint Request to file the Settlement Agreement
`(Ex. 1025) as business confidential information, which shall be kept separate
`from the file of the ’687 patent. Paper 9. After reviewing the Settlement
`Agreement between Petitioner and Patent Owner, we find that the
`Agreement contains confidential business information regarding the terms of
`settlement. We determine that good cause exists to treat the Settlement
`Agreement (Ex. 1025) between Petitioner and Patent Owner as business
`confidential information pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.74(c).
`This paper does not constitute a final written decision pursuant to
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`II. ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the IPR2021-00844 Petition is dismissed;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the IPR2021-00844 proceeding is
`terminated;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Request (Paper 9) to File
`Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1025) as Business Confidential Information
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Settlement Agreement (Ex. 1025)
`shall be kept separate from the file of U.S. Patent No. 7,636,687 B2 and
`made available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or
`to any person on a showing of good cause, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §317(b)
`and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c); and
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00844
`Patent 7,636,687 B2
`FURTHER ORDERED that this paper does not constitute a final
`written decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00844
`Patent 7,636,687 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`John Yates
`Brooks Tueting
`PATTERSON SHERIDAN
`jyates@pattersonsheridan.com
`btueting@pattersonsheridan.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Ali Dhanani
`Roger Fulghum
`Clarke Stavinhoa
`BAKER BOTTS LLP
`Ali.dhanani@bakerbotts.com
`Roger.fulghum@bakerbotts.com
`Clarke.stavinhoa@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`