`Date: May 3, 2017
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MICHAEL J. SINDONI, JR.,
`Application 14/834,548,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FCA US LLC,
`Patent 9,067,525,
`Respondent.
`____________
`
`Case DER2016-00003
`____________
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, SALLY C. MEDLEY, and JAMES T. MOORE,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case DER2016-00003
`Petitioner Application 14/834,548
`Respondent Patent 9,067,525 B1
`
`
`
`Introduction
`On January 26, 2016, Michael J. Sindoni, Jr. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition
`
`(“Pet.”) on the basis of Petitioner’s Application 14/834,548 (“the ’548
`application,” Ex. 1002). Paper 1. The Petition was filed nominally against
`Respondent’s Application 14/209,123, but that application issued as Patent No.
`9,067,525 B1 (“Respondent’s ’525 patent” or “the ’525 patent”) on June 30, 2015,
`more than six months prior to filing of the Petition. Petitioner filed Exhibit 1001
`and refers to it as Respondent’s Application 14/209,123 (Pet. 3), when in actuality
`it is a copy of the ’525 patent. Petitioner evidently regards the ’525 patent the
`same as Respondent’s Application 14/209,123. To minimize confusion, we
`consider the Petition as having been filed against the claims of Respondent’s ’525
`patent. We also regard Petitioner’s references to the claims of Respondent’s
`Application 14/209,123 as references to the claims of Respondent’s ’525 patent.
`
`No substantive Office Action has issued in Petitioner’s ’548 application.
`The ’548 application was published on March 3, 2016, as US Pub. App. 2016-
`0059763-A1. We see no reason to continue to maintain as non-public the records
`of this proceeding.
`
`Discussion
`Although Petitioner’s application still awaits initial examination and is
`
`without indication of allowable subject matter, more than fifteen months have
`passed since filing of the Petition. Respondent’s ’525 patent has issued since
`almost two years ago. Under this circumstance, it is appropriate to take action on
`the Petition.
`
`Accordingly, we now consider whether a trial to determine derivation of
`invention should be instituted based on the Petition. The parties may expect that a
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`Case DER2016-00003
`Petitioner Application 14/834,548
`Respondent Patent 9,067,525 B1
`
`
`decision on whether to institute trial to determine derivation of invention will issue
`in due course. This is not a decision, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.408, instituting trial for
`a derivation proceeding.
`
`
`
`Order
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.3(a), the Board herein exercises
`
`exclusive jurisdiction over Petitioner’s Application 14/834,548, such that
`prosecution of Petitioner’s Application 14/834,548 is suspended until further
`notice;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order will be placed in the file of
`Petitioner’s Application 14/834,548 and Respondent’s Patent No. 9,067,525 B1;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the record of this proceeding will be made
`public on or after May 20, 2017, unless either party submits a paper, prior to
`May 20, 2017, to explain why the record of this proceeding should still be
`maintained as non-public; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that if Petitioner can provide a more legible copy of
`the last two pages of Exhibit 1006, then another full copy of Exhibit 1006,
`including the more legible last two pages, shall be filed within two weeks of the
`date of this communication.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case DER2016-00003
`Petitioner Application 14/834,548
`Respondent Patent 9,067,525 B1
`
`For Petitioner:
`Robert Gray
`THE GRAY LAW GROUP LTD.
`robert.gray@thegraylawgroup.com
`
`For Respondent:
`Thomas Jurecko
`REMARCK LAW GROUP PLC
`tom@remarck.com
`
`
`4
`
`
`
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
