`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`Date Entered: November 3, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`REALTECK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01391
`Patent 5,825,898
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, TREVOR M. JEFFERSON, and
`JEREMY M. PLENZLER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JEFFERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Termination of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72 and 42.74
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01391
`Patent 5,825,898
`
`
`
`
`I. DISCUSSION
`
`On October 16, 2015, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Terminate this
`
`proceeding (Paper 6), a true copy of the parties’ settlement agreement (Ex. 2001),
`
`and a request to treat the settlement agreement as business confidential information
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 7).
`
`This proceeding is still in its preliminary stages. Petitioner, Realtek
`
`Semiconductor Corporation (“Realtek”), filed a Petition requesting an inter partes
`
`review of claims 1–28 of U.S. Patent No. 5,825,898 (“the ’898 patent”). Paper 1.
`
`Patent Owner, Andrea Electronics Corporation (“Andrea”), has not filed a
`
`Preliminary Response, and we have not entered a decision whether or not to
`
`institute an inter partes review.
`
`In the Joint Motion to Terminate this proceeding, the parties represent that
`
`they have settled their disputes regarding the ’898 patent. Paper 6, 2. The parties
`
`identify the following related matters: (1) the ’898 patent was asserted against
`
`multiple companies in the United States Court for the Eastern District of New
`
`York; (2) the ’898 patent is the subject of an International Trade Commission
`
`investigation; and (3) in the United States Court for the Northern District of
`
`California Realtek filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Andrea concerning a
`
`licensing agreement related to the ’898 patent. Id. at 2–4. The parties, however,
`
`do not represent that the ’898 patent is involved in any other proceedings before
`
`the Office. See generally id. Under these circumstances, we determine that it is
`
`appropriate to terminate this proceeding without rendering any further decisions.
`
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.72.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01391
`Patent 5,825,898
`
`
`
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`II. ORDER
`
`ORDERED that the parties’ request to treat the settlement agreement
`
`(Ex. 2001) as business confidential information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.74(c) is GRANTED; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Terminate this proceeding is
`
`GRANTED, and this proceeding is hereby terminated.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`IPR2015-01391
`Patent 5,825,898
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`John M. Caracappa
`Tremayne M. Norris
`Stanley C.T. Kuo
`Trevor C. Hill
`David L. Hecht
`Steptoe & Johnson LLP
`jcaracap@steptoe.com
`tnorris@steptoe.com
`skuo@steptoe.com
`thill@steptoe.com
`dhecht@steptoe.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Andy H. Chan
`George S. Haight
`Yue (Lily) Li
`Griffin Mesmer
`Pepper Hamilton LLP
`chana@pepperlaw.com
`haightg@pepperlaw.com
`lil@pepperlaw.com
`mesmerg@pepperlaw.com