`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
