Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 23
`Entered: Jan. 31, 2024
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC., AND
`AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, 1
`Petitioners,
`v.
`LS CLOUD STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`
`Before LARRY J. HUME, NEIL T. POWELL, and AMBER L. HAGY,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`HUME, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Settlement as to the Amazon Entities
`35 U.S.C. § 317; 37 C.F.R. § 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Cisco Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon
`Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com Services LLC, filed a petition in
`IPR2023-00733, and were joined as parties in this proceeding with Google,
`IPR2023-00120. Google, Cisco, and Microsoft have since been terminated
`as parties. Paper 15 (Google), Paper 19 (Microsoft), Paper 20 (Cisco).
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 23
`Entered: Jan. 31, 2024
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC., AND
`AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, 1
`Petitioners,
`v.
`LS CLOUD STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`
`Before LARRY J. HUME, NEIL T. POWELL, and AMBER L. HAGY,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`HUME, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Settlement as to the Amazon Entities
`35 U.S.C. § 317; 37 C.F.R. § 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Cisco Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon
`Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com Services LLC, filed a petition in
`IPR2023-00733, and were joined as parties in this proceeding with Google,
`IPR2023-00120. Google, Cisco, and Microsoft have since been terminated
`as parties. Paper 15 (Google), Paper 19 (Microsoft), Paper 20 (Cisco).
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Google LLC (“Google”) filed a Petition seeking institution of an inter
`partes review of claims 1–24 of U.S. Patent No. 10,154,092 B2 (Ex. 1001,
`“the ’092 patent”). Paper 2. After reviewing the Petition and Patent
`Owner’s preliminary response (Paper 6), we instituted an inter partes
`review. Paper 7.
`After institution, Cisco Systems, Inc., Microsoft Corporation,
`Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com Services
`LLC (collectively “Cisco et al.”), filed a petition and a joinder motion in
`IPR2023-00733, requesting that Cisco et al. be joined as a petitioner in
`IPR2023-00120. Cisco et al. v. LS Cloud Storage Technologies LLC,
`IPR2023-00733, Paper 1 (petition), Paper 5 (joinder motion). After
`considering the parties’ papers, we instituted trial in IPR2023-00733,
`granted Cisco et al.’s joinder motion, and added Cisco et al. as a petitioner to
`IPR2023-00120. Cisco et al. v. LS Cloud Storage Technologies LLC,
`IPR2023-00733, Paper 10 (Institution Decision). In addition, we entered a
`copy of that decision in IPR2023-00120. Paper 10.
`Subsequently, after a joint request by Petitioner Google and Patent
`Owner, we entered an Order to terminate this proceeding as to Petitioner
`Google (Paper 15), and after a request by Petitioner Microsoft and Patent
`Owner, we entered an Order to terminate this proceeding as to Petitioner
`Microsoft (Paper 19). Similarly, after a later joint request by Petitioner
`Cisco and Patent Owner, we entered an Order to terminate this proceeding as
`to Petitioner Cisco (Paper 20).
`On January 26, 2024, pursuant to our authorization, Petitioners
`Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com Services
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`LLC (hereinafter “Amazon Entities”) filed an “UNOPPOSED MOTION TO
`TERMINATE PROCEEDING PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 317(A) AND
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72.” IPR2023-00733, Paper 24 (“Motion” or “Mot.”).
`Patent Owner has indicated that it does not oppose. IPR2023-00733,
`Ex. 1024.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`
`In the Motion, the Amazon Entities state that they have settled their
`dispute with respect to IPR2023-00120 and IPR2023-00733 and with respect
`to the related district court litigation styled LS Cloud Storage Technologies
`LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Amazon.com
`Services, Inc., 1:22-CV-1167-RP, (W.D. Tex.). Mot. 4. As evidence of
`settlement, the Amazon Entities filed a copy of a “Final Judgment” issued by
`the district court in the Western District of Texas on March 16, 2023, in the
`above-cited district court case. IPR2023-00733, Ex. 1025.
`With the Motion, we note that neither the Amazon Entities nor Patent
`Owner filed a copy of a document styled as a settlement agreement.
`However, the Amazon Entities submit, unrebutted by Patent Owner, that
`Exhibit 1025, styled “Final Judgment,” is a true copy of a document
`representing the parties’ agreement to terminate this proceeding. “Petitioner
`is moving to terminate this proceeding because Patent Owner’s district court
`action against Petitioner was dismissed with prejudice. (Ex. 1025). There
`are no agreements, oral or written, between the parties made in connection
`with, or in contemplation of, the termination of the proceeding.” Mot. 4.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under
`this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`request of the petitioner and the patent owner, unless the Office has decided
`the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” Any
`agreement or understanding “made in connection with, or in contemplation
`of, the termination of an inter partes review” must be in writing, and a true
`copy of any such documents must be filed in the Office before termination.
`Id. § 317(b); accord 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b).
`Because the Amazon Entities, unrebutted by Patent Owner, request
`termination and have submitted that there are no agreements, oral or written,
`between the parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the
`termination of the proceeding in compliance with the applicable
`requirements, and because we have not yet issued a final written decision,
`we terminate the inter partes review with respect to Petitioner Amazon
`Entities. See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.74.
`Because no other petitioners remain in this inter partes review, and no
`final written decision on the merits has been entered, we terminate IPR2023-
`00120 and IPR2023-00733 as to all parties.
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the Unrebutted Motion to Terminate with respect to
`Petitioner Amazon Entities is granted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED this paper does not constitute a final written
`decision pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00120, IPR2023-00733
`Patent 10,154,092 B2
`
`For PETITIONERS:
`
`Brian Nash
`Cody Gartman
`Alex Yap
`Regan Rundio
`MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`bnash@mofo.com
`CGartman@mofo.com
`AYap@mofo.com
`RRundio@mofo.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`William P. Ramey, III
`Jacob B. Henry
`RAMEY LLP
`wramey@rameyfirm.com
`jhenry@rameyfirm.com
`uspto@rameyfirm.com
`
`
`
`5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
