`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. and
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`Petitioners,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`RFCYBER CORP.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2021-00980
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,189,787
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE PROCEEDINGS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,189,787 (“’787 patent”)
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 8,118,218 (“’218 FH”)
`
`Declaration of Gerald Smith Regarding Invalidity of U.S. Patent
`No. 8,118,218
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0165060 (“Dua”)
`
`Defendants’ Contingent Election Regarding Invalidity Defenses,
`RFCyber Corp v. Google LLC et al., Case Nos. 2:20-cv-00274-
`JRG and 2:20-cv-00335-JRG, DKT. 60, dated June 8, 2021
`
`GlobalPlatform Card Specification Version 2.1.1 (March 2003)
`(“GlobalPlatform” or “GP”)
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 8,448,855 (“’855 FH”)
`
`Smart Card Handbook Third Edition, by Wolfgang Rankl and
`Wolfgang Effing (2003)
`
`Common Electronic Purse Specifications, Technical
`Specification Version 2.3 (March 2001)
`
`SmartMX, P5CD009 Secure Dual Interface PKI Smart Card
`Controller, Short Form Specification (Rev. 1.0 – 2004 March 26)
`
`SmartMX, P5CD036 Secure Dual Interface PKI Smart Card
`Controller, Short Form Specification (Rev. 1.0 – 2004 March 26)
`
`SmartMX, P5CT072 Secure Dual Interface PKI Smart Card
`Controller, Short Form Specification (Rev. 1.3 – 4 October
`2004)
`
`Mifare proX, P8RF6016 Secure Dual Interface Smart Card IC,
`Short Form Specification (Revision 1.0 – November 2003)
`i
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`1026
`
`1027
`
`ETSI TS 102 226 V6.12.0 (2005-09), “Smart cards; Remote
`APDU structure for UICC based applications (Release 6)”
`
`Wenninger et al., “The Electronic Purse,” in Current Issues in
`Economics and Finance, Volume 1, Number 1, Federal Reserve
`Bank of New York (April 1995).
`
`File History of U.S. Patent Application No. 13/782,948
`
`Excerpt from Cambridge Business English Dictionary
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,983,882
`
`RFID Handbook – Radio-Frequency Identification Fundamentals
`and Applications, Klaus Finkenzeller, John Wiley & Son, Ltd.
`(1999)
`
`Mifare Standard Card IC MF1 IC S50 Functional Specification;
`Product Specification Revision 5.0, Philips Semiconductors
`(November 1999)
`
`ISO/IEC 7816-4:1995 Interindustry commands for interchange
`(May 1995)
`
`U.S. Government General Services Administration (GSA) Smart
`Card Handbook (FEB 2004)
`
`“Here Comes The Wallet Phone,” IEEE Spectrum, November
`2005
`
`File History of U.S. Patent No. 9,189,787 (“’787 FH”)
`
`PCT Application Publication No. WO 98/49658 A1 to Visa
`International Service Association (“Davis”)
`
`RFC 3261, SIP: Session Initiation Protocol, The Internet Society
`(June 2002).
`
`Hargrave’s Communications Dictionary, IEEE Press, p. 24
`(defining “applet”) (excerpted)
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`1030
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1043
`
`1044
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0177045
`
`European Patent No. 1,369,842
`
`PCT Publication No. WO02/241236
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,792,536
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0005050
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,748,636
`
`File history of U.S. Patent No. 7,747,636
`
`NXP Semiconductors 2006 Annual Report
`
`SEC Report: Amendment No 1 to Form F-1 Registration
`Statement, filed by NXP Semiconductors, March 22, 2011
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0208066
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,498,898 to Kogen et al. (“Kogen”)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0196931
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`RESERVED
`
`Plaintiff RFCyber’s Election of Asserted Claims to Defendants
`Google LLC, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., and Samsung
`Electronics America, Inc., Case Nos. 2:20-cv-00274-JRG and
`2:20-cv-00335-JRG, dated September 15, 2021
`
`1045
`
`Plaintiff RFCyber’s Final Election of Asserted Claims to
`Defendants Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., and Samsung
`
`iii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`Electronics America, Inc., Case Nos. 2:20-cv-00274-JRG and
`2:20-cv-00335-JRG, dated October 11, 2021
`
`1046
`
`Defendant Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.’s, and Samsung
`Electronics America, Inc.’s Motion to Strike the Priority Date
`Set Forth in Plaintiff’s Interrogatory Responses, Case Nos. 2:20-
`cv-00274-JRG and 2:20-cv-00335-JRG, dated October 6, 2021
`
`1047
`
`Confidential settlement agreement between Samsung and
`RFCyber
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), Petitioners Samsung Electronics America,
`
`Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Petitioners”) and Patent Owner RFCyber
`
`Corp. (“Patent Owner”) jointly request that this inter partes review proceeding
`
`involving U.S. Patent No. 9,189,787 (“the ’787 patent”) be terminated based on an
`
`agreement between Petitioners and Patent Owner (“the Parties”).
`
`Petitioners and Patent Owner have settled their dispute regarding the ’787
`
`patent, including both this proceeding and Patent Owner’s assertion of the ’787
`
`Patent in the related district court litigations, RFCyber Corp. v. Google LLC and
`
`Google Payment Corp., Case No. 2:20-cv-00274-JRG (E.D. Tex.) (Lead Case) and
`
`RFCyber Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00335-
`
`JRG (E.D. Tex.) (Member case). The Parties do not anticipate any further litigation
`
`between them concerning the ’787 patent.
`
`II. REASONS FOR GRANTING THE MOTION
`
`Generally, the Board expects that a proceeding will terminate after the filing
`
`of a settlement agreement between parties made in connection with, or in
`
`contemplation of, the termination of the proceeding, unless the Board has already
`
`decided the merits of the proceeding. 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 March 29, 2022. Guidance as to the content of a motion to
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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.
`
`A. Brief Explanation of Why Termination is Appropriate
`
`Good cause exists to terminate this proceeding because the parties have settled
`
`their dispute regarding the ’787 patent and the proceeding is still at an early state.
`
`Terminating this proceeding thus serves the interests of judicial economy as well as
`
`the mutual interests of the parties.
`
`Termination is appropriate because no patent owner response or further papers
`
`have been filed, oral argument has not been held, and the Board has not decided the
`
`merits of the proceeding, i.e., a final written decision has not been issued. Under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 317(a), this proceeding “shall be terminated” because the parties are jointly
`
`requesting termination and the Office has not yet “decided the merits of the
`
`proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The Parties have resolved
`
`their disputes and executed an agreement which contemplates requesting termination
`
`of this proceeding and dismissing the Parties’ related proceeding regarding the ’787
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`patent in RFCyber Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., 2:20-cv-00335
`
`
`
`(E.D. Tex.).
`
`B. All Parties in Any Pending Related Litigation Involving the
`Patent at Issue
`
`The following litigation is related to the ’787 patent and the Parties:
`
` RFCyber Corp. v. Google LLC and Google Payment Corp., Case No.
`
`2:20-cv-00274-JRG (E.D. Tex.) (Lead Case) and RFCyber Corp. v.
`
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00335-JRG
`
`(E.D. Tex.) (Member case)
`
`A joint motion to dismiss was submitted in the above actions on March 25, 2022.
`
` The ’787 patent is also the subject of concurrent litigation between Patent
`
`Owner and Apple Inc. (“Apple”) in the Western District of Texas: RFCyber Corp.
`
`v. Apple Inc., 6:21-cv-00916 (W.D. Tex.) (“the Apple Litigation”). Petitioners are
`
`not a party to the Apple Litigation. A complaint was filed September 7, 2021 in the
`
`Apple Litigation and the case is currently pending.
`
`C. Related Proceedings Currently Before the Office
`
`The ’787 patent is the subject of IPR2022-00412 filed by Apple (“the Apple
`
`IPR”). The Apple IPR was filed January 14, 2022 and a Motion for Joinder to the
`
`present IPR is currently pending before the Board.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Parties submit that none of the above proceedings are cause for the Board
`
`
`
`to deny the present Motion as they do not involve the present parties and/or are
`
`inapplicable to consideration of a motion to terminate.
`
`D. Current Status of Each Such Related Litigation or 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. AGREEMENT
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b), the Parties’
`
`agreement made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of the
`
`proceeding is in writing, and a true and correct copy is being filed concurrently
`
`herewith as Exhibit 1047.1 There are no other agreements, oral or written, between
`
`the parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of this
`
`proceeding. 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 this agreement as business
`
`confidential information and keep it separate from the files of the ’787 patent.
`
`
`1 The agreement is being filed via the Patent Trial and Appeal Board End to End
`
`(PTAB E2E) system with access to the “Parties and Board only.”
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`
`
`
`For all these reasons, the Parties respectfully request termination of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`Date: March 29, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/Heath J. Briggs/
`
`Heath J. Briggs
`Reg. No. 54,919
`Greenberg Traurig, LLP
`1144 15th St. Suite 3300
`Denver, CO 80202
`Telephone: 303-685-7418
`Facsimile: 303-572-6540
`BriggsH@gtlaw.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`/Vincent J. Rubino /
`
`Vincent J. Rubino, III
`Reg. No. 68,594
`FABRICANT LLP
`411 Theodore Fremd Road, Suite 206
`South Rye, New York 10580
`Tel. 212-257-5797
`Fax. 212-257-5796 Email:
`vrubino@fabricantllp.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`