`$71-272-7822
`
`Paper No. 22
`Entered: February 22, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA,INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`Vv.
`
`WEST VIEW RESEARCH, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2016-00177
`Patent 8,781,839
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, KEVIN W. CHERRY,and
`JASON J. CHUNG,Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZECHER,Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`JUDGMENT
`FINAL WRITTEN DECISION
`Inter Partes Review
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C_F.R. § 42.73(b)
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00177
`Patent 8,781,839 Bl
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`On November17, 2015, Petitioner, Volkswagen Group of America,
`
`Inc. (“Volkswagen”), filed a Petition requesting an inter partes review of
`
`claims 1, 10, 11, 16, 22, 23, 29, and 35 of US. Patent No. 8,781,839 B1
`
`(Ex. 1001, “the *839 patent”). Paper 2. Patent Owner, West View Research
`
`Limited Liability Corporation (“West View”), filed a Preliminary Response.
`
`Paper 6. On May13, 2016, weinstituted an inter partes review as to all of
`
`the challenged claims of the ’839 patent. Paper 8.
`
`On February 9, 2016, West View filed a Request for Adverse
`
`Judgment pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Paper 20 (“Mot.”). West View
`
`requests that we cancelall of the challenged claims of the 839 patent and, as
`
`a consequence, enter adverse judgment against West Viewinthistrial.
`
`Mot. 1. For the reasons discussed below, we grant West View’s Request for
`
`Adverse Judgment.
`
`II.
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`A party may request entry of adverse judgmentagainstitself at any
`
`time during a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b). Actions construed to be a
`
`request for adverse judgmentinclude, amongotherthings, cancellation or
`
`disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim inthetrial.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2). West View has requested that we cancel claims1,
`
`10, 11, 16, 22, 23, 29, and 35, whichare all of the challenged claims
`
`involvedin this trial. Given that West View has no remaining claims inthis
`
`trial, entry of adverse judgment against West View and cancellation of all of
`
`the challenged claims of the ’839 patent is appropriate.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00177
`Patent 8,781,839 Bl
`
`Il. ORDER
`
`In consideration of the foregoing,it is
`
`ORDEREDthat West View’s Request for Adverse Judgementis
`
`GRANTED;
`
`ORDEREDthat adverse judgmentis entered against West View with
`respect to claims 1, 10, 11, 16, 22, 23, 29, and 35 of the 839 patent;
`FURTHER ORDEREDthatclaims 1, 10, 11, 16, 22, 23, 29, and 35 of
`
`the 839 patent are cancelled;' and
`
`FURTHER ORDEREDthat, becausethis is a Final Written Decision,
`
`parties to this proceeding seeking judicial review of our decision must
`
`comply with the notice and service requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 90.2.
`
`' See 37 C.F R. § 42.80 (indicating that, after the Board issuesafinal written
`decision in an inter partes patent review proceeding, the Office will issue
`and publish a certificate canceling any claim ofthe patentfinally determined
`to be unpatentable).
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00177
`Patent 8,781,839 Bl
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`MichaelJ. Lennon
`Clifford A. Ulrich
`Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
`mlennon@kenyon.com
`culrich@kenyon.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Peter J. Gutierrez, III
`Mark Wang
`Gazdzinski & Associates, PC
`docket@gazpat.com
`
`
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
