13459711 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 15, 2014)

Corning Gilbert Inc. v PPC Broadband, Inc.

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardApr 15, 2014

13459711 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 15, 2014)

Trials@uspto.gov Paper 27 571-272-7822 Entered: April 15, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ CORNING GILBERT INC., Petitioner, v. PPC BROADBAND, INC., Patent Owner. ____________ Case IPR2013-00343 Patent 8,313,353 B2 ____________ Before JAMESON LEE, MICHAEL R. ZECHER, and JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judges. BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judge. JUDGMENT Request for Adverse Judgment 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) Case IPR2013-00343 Patent 8,313,353 B2 2 On April 14, 2014, PPC Broadband Inc. (“PPC”) filed a “Patent Owner’s Request for Adverse Judgment Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)” (“Request”). Paper 26; see also Paper 25. The Request states that “[i]n the interest of streamlining the proceedings and focusing its resources, the Patent Owner decided to cancel all of the claims (1-6) of the 8,313,353 Patent involved in this proceeding.” Paper 26 at 1. In the Request, PPC requests cancellation of all claims at issue in this proceeding, i.e., claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,313,353 B2 (“the ’353 patent) (Ex. 1001). Id. We note that 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2) indicates that the Board will construe cancellation of all claims at issue in a trial as a request for adverse judgment. Along these lines, PPC also requests that the Board enter a final adverse judgment against PPC. Id.1 We grant PPC’s request to cancel claims 1-6 of the ’353 patent. We also grant PPC’s request for entry of adverse judgment against itself in this proceeding. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that PPC’s request for judgment against itself under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b) is GRANTED; and FURTHER ORDERED that judgment is entered herein against PPC with respect to claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 8,313,353 B2. 1 PPC has not filed a request for entry of adverse judgment in related IPR2013-00345, where Petitioner Corning Gilbert Inc. has challenged claims 7-27 of the ’353 patent. Case IPR2013-00343 Patent 8,313,353 B2 3 For PETITIONER: Todd R. Walters Roger H. Lee Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC todd.walters@bipc.com roger.lee@bipc.com For PATENT OWNER: Denis J. Sullivan Douglas J. Nash HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP dsullivan@hblaw.com dnash@hblaw.com