Amazon.com, Inc.v.Pragmatus Mobile, LLC

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 2, 2016

13404977 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 2, 2016)

Trials@uspto.gov Paper No. 23
571.272.7822 Entered: February 2, 2016

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
_______________
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
PRAGMATUS MOBILE, LLC,
Patent Owner.
_______________

Case IPR2015-01085
Patent 8,466,795 B2
_______________

Before JUSTIN T. ARBES, BART A. GERSTENBLITH, and
JASON J. CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judges.

GERSTENBLITH, Administrative Patent Judge.

JUDGMENT
TERMINATION OF TRIAL
37 C.F.R. §§ 42.72, 42.73

I. DISCUSSION
Lenovo (United States) Inc. (“Petitioner”) and Pragmatus Mobile,
LLC (“Patent Owner”) filed a joint motion to terminate the proceeding
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. Paper 22. Along with
their motion, the parties filed a “true and correct” copy of a document they
IPR2015-01085
Patent 8,466,795 B2

2
describe as the settlement agreement (Ex. 1011). Id. at 2. The parties
represent that there are no other agreements, oral or written, between them
made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of this
proceeding. Id. The joint motion also requests that the settlement
agreement be treated as business confidential information and kept separate
under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Id. at
5.
Generally, the Board expects that a proceeding will terminate after the
filing of a settlement agreement. See, e.g., Office Patent Trial Practice
Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,768 (Aug. 14, 2012). Although trial has
been instituted, we have not decided the merits of the proceeding. 35 U.S.C.
§ 317(a) (“An inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be
terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the
petitioner and the patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of
the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.”); 37 C.F.R.
§ 42.72 (“The Board may terminate a trial without rendering a final written
decision, where appropriate . . . .”). We are persuaded that, under these
circumstances, termination of this proceeding is appropriate.
II. ORDER
Accordingly, it is:
ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate this proceeding
(Paper 22) is granted;
FURTHER ORDERED that the joint request by the parties that the
settlement agreement (Ex. 1011) be treated as business confidential
information, kept separate from the file of the involved patent, and made
available only to Federal Government agencies on written request, or to any
IPR2015-01085
Patent 8,466,795 B2

3
person on a showing of good cause, under the provisions of 35 U.S.C.
§ 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 22), is granted; and
FURTHER ORDERED that this trial is terminated.

IPR2015-01085
Patent 8,466,795 B2

4
For PETITIONER:

Todd E. Landis
Eric J. Klein
Ruben H. Munoz
AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP
tlandis@akingump.com
eklein@akingump.com
rmunoz@akingump.com

For PATENT OWNER:

David Alberti
FEINBERG DAY ALBERTI & THOMPSON LLP
dalberti@feinday.com

Michael Casey
DAVID BERQUIST JACKSON & GOWDEY, LLP
mcasey@dbjg.com