`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`––––––––––
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`––––––––––
`
`WORLD PROGRAMMING LIMITED,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SAS INSTITUTE, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`––––––––––
`
`Case No. IPR2019-01457
`
`U.S. Patent 7,170,519
`
`––––––––––
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS THE PETITION
`AND TERMINATE THE PROCEEDING BEFORE INSTITUTION
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01457
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`On December 9, 2019, the Board authorized Petitioner World Programming
`
`Limited to file a motion to dismiss its petition for inter partes review and terminate
`
`the proceeding. This proceeding is in its preliminary phase. Patent Owner SAS
`
`Institute has filed a Preliminary Response but the Board has yet to reach the merits
`
`and issue a decision on institution. World Programming requests that the Board to
`
`dismiss its petition and terminate IPR2019-01457 to preserve the Board’s and
`
`parties’ resources and to achieve a just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution to this
`
`dispute that does not cause prejudice to SAS Institute. SAS Institute does not
`
`oppose this motion.
`
`II.
`
`PROCEDURAL HISTORY
`
`The petition for inter partes review was filed on August 5, 2019. This
`
`proceeding is related to a district court action entitled SAS Institute Inc. v. World
`
`Programming Limited, et al., which is pending in the United States District Court
`
`for the Eastern District of Texas and is assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-00295. The
`
`patent at issue in this proceeding is one of four patents currently asserted against
`
`World Programming. The district court action is set for a jury trial in August 2020.
`
`III. ARGUMENT
`
`Good cause exists to dismiss World Programming’s petition for inter partes
`
`review and terminate this proceeding. Termination will preserve the Board’s and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01457
`
`
`the parties’ resources, and would expeditiously resolve World Programming’s
`
`request, furthering the purpose of IPR challenges. 37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). This
`
`proceeding is in its preliminary stage as the Board has not yet reached the merits
`
`and issue a decision on institution. SAS Institute does not oppose termination and
`
`will not be prejudiced by termination.
`
`The Board “may terminate a trial without rendering a final written decision,
`
`where appropriate...” 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The Rules governing IPR proceedings
`
`“shall be construed to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of every
`
`proceeding.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). In determining whether a termination request is
`
`“appropriate,” the Board has looked primarily to the stage of the proceedings when
`
`a request is made, and has repeatedly granted pre-institution termination. See, e.g.,
`
`IPR2014-00905, Paper 7 at 1 (Aug. 26, 2014) (granting unopposed motion to
`
`terminate stating that a “decision on the Petition … has not yet been rendered.
`
`Under these circumstances, we determine that it is appropriate … to terminate this
`
`proceeding without rendering a final written decision.”)
`
`The Board has repeatedly stated in other decisions that the stage of the
`
`proceeding is the most relevant factor to be considered in addressing a termination
`
`request. Cf. IPR2013-00016, Paper 31 at 3 (Dec. 11, 2013) (holding that “in view
`
`of the advanced stage of this proceeding, rather than terminate this proceeding, the
`
`Board will proceed to a final written decision” despite the joint nature of the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01457
`
`
`motion); IPR2015-00035, Paper 30 at 4 (June 25, 2015) (“The instant proceeding
`
`is not in a preliminary stage; we issued a decision instituting inter partes review
`
`[two months prior].”). This proceeding is in its preliminary stage and termination
`
`is proper.
`
`The Board should grant World Programming’s motion. Such termination
`
`will further the purpose of the rules by expeditiously resolving this dispute without
`
`subjecting the Board and the parties to unnecessary expense involved in taking
`
`IPR2019-01457 through trial. The parties will incur substantial expense in
`
`preparing and presenting expert declarants for deposition, submitting substantive
`
`briefs and motions, and presenting at an oral hearing. Because of the procedural
`
`posture of the district court action, it is unlikely that a final written decision will
`
`issue in this proceeding before the district court action is tried to a jury, and
`
`therefore the parties are likely to incur duplicative expenses litigating the same or
`
`similar invalidity issues in this proceeding and in the district court. Therefore,
`
`World Programming submits that it is more efficient to focus its limited resources
`
`on the district court action and termination will not prejudice SAS Institute.
`
`In addition, the Board will also have to expend substantial resources if it
`
`were to decline to terminate IPR2019-01457. It will likely be requested to address
`
`various procedural disputes, address potential requests for additional discovery,
`
`preside over an oral hearing, and draft a substantive decision on institution and a
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01457
`
`
`final written decision on the merits. All of these resources can be spared by
`
`terminating IPR2019-01457. Termination will reduce the overall burden of this
`
`dispute on the Board. Thus, termination will secure the “the just, speedy, and
`
`inexpensive resolution” of the proceeding without prejudice to SAS Institute, and
`
`SAS Institute does not oppose the Board terminating IPR2019-01457.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`The Board should dismiss World Programming’s petition and terminate
`
`IPR2019-01457.
`
`
`
`Date: December 16, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Harper Batts
`Harper Batts (Reg. No. 56,160)
`hbatts@sheppardmullin.com
`Chris Ponder (Reg. No. 77,167)
`cponder@sheppardmullin.com
`Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
`379 Lytton Avenue
`Palo Alto, CA 94301
`T: (650) 815-2600
`F: (650) 815-2601
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-01457
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on December 16, 2019, a complete copy
`
`of the foregoing Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to Dismiss the Petition and Terminate
`
`the Proceeding Before Institution was served via email to all parties to this proceeding
`
`at the addresses indicated:
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`
`David B. Cochran (Reg. No. 39,142)
`dcochran@jonesday.com
`Joseph M. Sauer (Reg. No. 47,919)
`jmsauer@jonesday.com
`Joshua Nightingale (Reg. No. 67,865)
`jrnightingale@jonesday.com
`
`Brenton R. Babcock (Reg. No. 39,592)
`brent.babcock@wbd-us.com
`Joshua P. Davis (Reg. No. 72,524)
`joshua.p.davis@wbd-us.com
`Tony Chen (Reg. No. 67,414)
`tony.chen@wbd-us.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: December 16, 2019
`
`
`
`
` /Harper Batts/
`Harper Batts (Reg. No. 56,160)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`
`
`