`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02767 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02769 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02772 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02781 – JPM-tmp
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`1
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`FACEBOOK, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`LINKEDIN CORP.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`GROUPON, INC.,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 2 of 8 PageID 604
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02782 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02783 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02823 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02824 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`PANDORA MEDIA, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`TWITTER, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`BARNES & NOBLE, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`AMERICA, LLC,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 3 of 8 PageID 605
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02825 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02826 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02827 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02828 – JPM-tmp
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`3
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
`INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT
`AMERICA LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SONY MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SONY ELECTRONICS INC.,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 4 of 8 PageID 606
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02829 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02830 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02831 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02833 – JPM-tmp
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`4
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`MICROSOFT CORP.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`PEOPLE MEDIA, INC.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 5 of 8 PageID 607
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02834 – JPM-tmp
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 12-cv-02866 – JPM-tmp
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
` )
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`MATCH.COM, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`MOTOROLA MOBILITY
`HOLDINGS LLC,
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT INTERIM STATUS
`NOTICE REGARDING INTER PARTES REVIEWS
`
`
`
`On April 15, 2015, the parties to this action (and the seventeen related actions by
`
`plaintiff) filed a Joint Interim Status Notice to provide the Court with updated information on the
`
`inter partes reviews initiated during 2014, consistent with the Order Granting Motions to Stay
`
`entered on December 6, 2013.1 In that April notice, the parties reported that the Patent Trial and
`
`Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office had entered written
`
`1 / The Order Granting Motions to Stay bears differing ECF Numbers among the eighteen
`related cases. It is ECF No. 71 in the first listed case, B.E. Technology, LLC v. Amazon Digital
`Services, Inc., No. 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp. The inter partes review proceedings are identified
`by IPR Number, Patent, Claims, and Filer in notices previously filed with the Court, one
`counterpart of which is ECF No. 75 in the Amazon case. A counterpart of the April 15, 2015
`joint notice is ECF No. 78 in the Amazon case.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 6 of 8 PageID 608
`
`decisions in those proceedings, finding that every claim of U.S. Patent Numbers 6,771,290 and
`
`6,628,314 asserted against any of the eighteen defendants in these actions is unpatentable. The
`
`parties committed to keep the Court informed of material developments in the PTAB
`
`proceedings, and suggested in substance that the existing stay Orders remain in effect pending
`
`plaintiff’s determination of whether to appeal one or more of the PTAB decisions.
`
`
`
`Since that joint notice, plaintiff has in fact commenced appeals of the PTAB decisions in
`
`all eleven of the inter parties review proceedings. In view of this development, and to continue
`
`achievement of the purposes of the stay Orders, the parties request that the stays in this and the
`
`corresponding actions remain in effect until the conclusion of such appeals. The parties continue
`
`their commitment to apprise the Court promptly of developments that logically would warrant
`
`consideration of dissolving or modifying the stays or a resumed case schedule.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted:
`
`s/_Robert E. Freitas (PER CONSENT BY ASB)_
`Robert E. Freitas (CA Bar No. 80948)
`FREITAS ANGELL & WEINBERG LLP
`350 Marine Parkway, Suite 200
`Redwood Shores, CA 94065
`Telephone: (650) 593-6300
`Facsimile: (650) 593-6301
`rfreitas@fawlaw.com
`
`Richard M. Carter (TN B.P.R. #7285)
`MARTIN, TATE,MORROW &MARSTON, P.C.
`6410 Poplar Avenue, Suite 1000
`Memphis, TN 38119-4839
`Telephone: (901) 522-9000
`Facsimile: (901) 527-3746
`rcarter@martintate.com
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 7 of 8 PageID 609
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`s/ Adam S. Baldridge
`Bradley E. Trammell (TN #13980)
`Adam S. Baldridge (TN #023488)
`Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell &
`Berkowitz, P.C.
`165 Madison Avenue, Suite 2000
`Memphis, TN 38103
`Telephone: 901.577.2121
`Email: btrammell@bakerdonelson.com
`Email: abaldrige@bakerdonelson.com
`
`Of Counsel:
`Ruffin B. Cordell (TX #4820550)
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`1425 K Street, N.W., 11th Floor
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Cordell@fr.com
`
`Kelly C. Hunsaker (CA Bar No. 168307)
`Leeron G. Kalay (CA Bar No. 23359)
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`500 Arguello Street, Suite 500
`Redwood City, CA 94063
`Telephone: (650) 839-5070
`hunsaker@fr.com
`kalay@fr.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02783-JPM-tmp Document 65 Filed 06/22/15 Page 8 of 8 PageID 610
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The foregoing notice having been filed on June 22, 2015 via the Court’s CM/ECF
`
`system, a copy is being automatically served upon all counsel of record for both parties in each
`
`of the above-captioned actions.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/ Adam S. Baldridge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8