`571.272.7822
`
`
`Paper No. 9
`
` Entered: November 5, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GAMELOFT, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INVENTOR HOLDINGS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01771
`Patent 8,784,198
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KERRY BEGLEY, and
`BETH Z. SHAW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`SHAW, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`JUDGMENT
`Termination of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.72
`
`On October 27, 2015, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate the
`instant proceeding. Paper 8. In support of the motion, the parties allege
`that they have agreed to terminate the proceeding because, in the related
`district court litigation, the district court entered a decision finding all
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01771
`Patent 8,784,198
`
`
`claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,784,198 (“the ’198 patent”) invalid under 35
`U.S.C. § 101. Id. at 2. Patent Owner agreed that the judgement was final
`and agreed not to appeal the district court judgement. Id. The parties filed
`a copy of a Stipulation filed in the district court, which the parties contend
`is the agreement required under 37 U.S.C. § 317(b). Id. at 3; Ex. 1012.
`The Stipulation states, in part, that “the parties further stipulate that
`Inventor Holdings waives appeal of the Final Judgment.” Ex. 1012 at 3.
`Petitioner filed the Petition in this proceeding on August 19, 2015.
`Patent Owner has not yet filed a Preliminary Response, which is due on or
`before November 29, 2015. No decision whether to institute a trial has
`been made.
`Upon consideration of the joint request before us, terminating the
`instant proceeding promotes efficiency and minimizes unnecessary costs. In
`particular, there is no remaining public interest in another determination of
`patentability of the ’198 patent because Patent Owner has agreed not to
`appeal the ruling of invalidity of all claims of the ’198 patent, as determined
`by the district court. Based on the facts of this case, it is appropriate to enter
`judgment.1 See 35 U.S.C. § 317(a); 37 C.F.R. § 42.72.
`
`
`1 A judgment means a final written decision by the Board, or a termination
`of a proceeding. 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01771
`Patent 8,784,198
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate IPR2015-01771 is
`
`granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the instant proceeding is hereby
`
`terminated as to all parties.
`
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`Eric Buresh
`eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`
`Mark Lang
`mark.lang@eriseip.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`Tarek N. Fahmi
`tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`
`Holly J. Atkinson
`holly.atkinson@ascendalaw.com