`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper 9
` Entered: April 20, 2017
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ASSA ABLOY AB,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNIKEY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00679
`Patent 9,057,210 B2
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, RAMA G. ELLURU, and
`DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`ADVERSE JUDGMENT
`FINAL WRITTEN DECISION
`35 U.S.C. § 318(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00679
`Patent 9,057,210 B2
`
`
`I. DISCUSSION
`
`ASSA ABLOY AB (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition requesting inter
`
`partes review of claims 1–7, 9, 10, 12–18, 20–29, 31, 33–35, 37–42, 44,
`
`and 45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,057,210 B2. Paper 2. UniKey Technologies,
`
`Inc. (“Patent Owner”) filed a Power of Attorney (Paper 4) and Mandatory
`
`Notices under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8 (Paper 5), but Patent Owner did not file a
`
`Preliminary Response. We instituted trial on all challenged claims, issuing a
`
`Scheduling Order (Paper 7), which set November 21, 2016 as DUE DATE 1,
`
`the due date by which Patent Owner was required to file a Response to the
`
`Petition and a Motion to Amend. The parties did not stipulate to different
`
`due dates. Patent Owner did not file a Response to the Petition or a Motion
`
`to Amend by the November 21, 2016 due date set under the Scheduling
`
`Order.
`
`On March 29, 2017, we entered an Order to Show Cause as to why we
`
`should not construe Patent Owner’s failure to act as consistent with
`
`abandonment of the contest and enter adverse judgment against Patent
`
`Owner pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4), which states that “[a]ctions
`
`construed to be a request for adverse judgment include . . . [a]bandonment of
`
`the contest.” Paper 8. The Order set a deadline for Patent Owner to file a
`
`paper demonstrating good cause why adverse judgment should not be
`
`entered at ten business days (April 12, 2017) after the date of the Order.
`
`Since the time of entry of the Order to Show Cause, Patent Owner has not
`
`contacted the Board, nor has Patent Owner filed a paper in response to the
`
`Order by the April 12, 2017 deadline.
`
`Under these particular circumstances, we treat the failure of Patent
`
`Owner to timely file a response to the Petition and a Motion to Amend and
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00679
`Patent 9,057,210 B2
`
`to timely file a responsive paper to the Order to Show Cause, along with a
`
`lack of any other communications from Patent Owner on this issue, as
`
`consistent with abandonment of the contest. Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b), we
`
`construe this abandonment as a request for adverse judgment.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`II. ORDER
`
`ORDERED that adverse judgment is entered against Patent Owner
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that claims 1–7, 9, 10, 12–18, 20–29, 31, 33–
`
`35, 37–42, 44, and 45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,057,210 B2 will be cancelled;1
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that, because this 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 See 37 C.F.R. § 42.80 (indicating that after the Board issues a final written
`decision in an inter partes review proceeding, the Office will issue and
`publish a certificate canceling any claim of the patent finally determined to
`be unpatentable).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00679
`Patent 9,057,210 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Thomas A. Rozylowicz
`Kenneth Wayne Darby, Jr.
`IPR42746-0006IP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Steven M. Bauer
`Joseph A. Capraro Jr
`Gerald Worth
`Micah Miller
`PTABMattersBoston@proskauer.com
`JCapraro@proskauer.com
`gworth@proskauer.com
`mmiller@proskauer.com
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`