PTAB
Advanced fields
9 decisions · 312msnewest first
  • PTAB · Aug 11, 2014 · IPR2014-00760 · APJ Glenn J Perry · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties without issuing a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties have requested that these trial proceedings be terminated pursuant to a settlement. On August 6, 2014, the Board authorized2 the parties to file a Joint Motion to Terminate these proceedings along with a true copy of any and all settlement agreements between them related to the patent at issue. The parties filed in each case a Joint Motion to Terminate3 in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The parties also filed in each case a Joint Motion to Treat the Parties’ Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential4 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and Rule 42.74. The settlement agreement5 purports to settle matters between the parties with respect to each of the patents at issue in this inter partes review. Each of the captioned inter partes reviews is in its preliminary stage. A decision on the respective Petitions6 has not yet been rendered. The parties have identified the following USPTO proceedings that are pending.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,048,032
  • PTAB · Aug 11, 2014 · IPR2014-00763 · APJ Glenn J Perry · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties under the settlement, without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “ORDER It is, therefore, ORDERED that the joint motions to terminate these proceedings are GRANTED and the proceedings are hereby terminated as to all parties including, Petitioners and Patent Owner; and FURTHER ORDERED that the parties’ joint requests that the settlement agreement, as filed in each case, be treated as business confidential information and kept separate from the file of the involved patent under the provisions of to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c), are GRANTED.” slip op. at 4

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,292,850
  • PTAB · Aug 11, 2014 · IPR2014-00762 · APJ Glenn J Perry · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties after settlement, without issuing a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties have requested that these trial proceedings be terminated pursuant to a settlement. On August 6, 2014, the Board authorized2 the parties to file a Joint Motion to Terminate these proceedings along with a true copy of any and all settlement agreements between them related to the patent at issue. The parties filed in each case a Joint Motion to Terminate3 in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The parties also filed in each case a Joint Motion to Treat the Parties’ Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential4 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and Rule 42.74. The settlement agreement5 purports to settle matters between the parties with respect to each of the patents at issue in this inter partes review.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,292,850
  • PTAB · Aug 11, 2014 · IPR2014-00759 · APJ Glenn J Perry · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties after settlement, without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties have requested that these trial proceedings be terminated pursuant to a settlement. On August 6, 2014, the Board authorized2 the parties to file a Joint Motion to Terminate these proceedings along with a true copy of any and all settlement agreements between them related to the patent at issue. The parties filed in each case a Joint Motion to Terminate3 in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The parties also filed in each case a Joint Motion to Treat the Parties’ Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential4 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and Rule 42.74. The settlement agreement5 purports to settle matters between the parties with respect to each of the patents at issue in this inter partes review. Each of the captioned inter partes reviews is in its preliminary stage. A decision on the respective Petitions6 has not yet been rendered. The parties have identified the following USPTO proceedings that are pending.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,142,413
  • PTAB · Aug 11, 2014 · IPR2014-00761 · APJ Glenn J Perry · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the joint motions and terminated the proceedings as to all parties without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “The parties have requested that these trial proceedings be terminated pursuant to a settlement. On August 6, 2014, the Board authorized2 the parties to file a Joint Motion to Terminate these proceedings along with a true copy of any and all settlement agreements between them related to the patent at issue. The parties filed in each case a Joint Motion to Terminate3 in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 327(a) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.72. The parties also filed in each case a Joint Motion to Treat the Parties’ Settlement Agreement as Business Confidential4 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and Rule 42.74. The settlement agreement5 purports to settle matters between the parties with respect to each of the patents at issue in this inter partes review.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 8,048,032
  • PTAB · Jun 16, 2014 · IPR2014-00130 · APJ Barbara A Parvis · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated IPR2014-00130 as to all parties without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The requirement for terminating review with respect to Petitioner is met. Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “If no petitioner remains in the inter partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written decision under section 318(a).” FLIR Systems is the sole petitioner in this review. The Board has discretion to terminate this review with respect to e- Watch as Patent Owner.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,970,183
  • PTAB · Mar 28, 2014 · IPR2013-00412 · APJ Jameson Lee · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated IPR2013-00412 as to Toyota and AVS without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “ORDER Termination of Proceeding 37 C.F.R. § 42.72 On March 26, 2014, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate this inter partes review with respect to both Petitioner (“Toyota”) and Patent Owner (“AVS”). Paper 35. Also on March 26, 2014, the parties filed a copy of their written settlement agreement covering Patent 6,738,697 involved in this inter partes review (Ex. 2001), and a joint request to have their settlement agreement treated as confidential business information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c) (Paper 36). The parties represent that there are no collateral agreements referred to in their settlement agreement. Paper 35, 1.” slip op. at 1

    • PTAB / AIA Trials › §315(e) estoppelOther

      “Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “[a]n inter partes review instituted under this chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The requirement for terminating review with respect to Petitioner is met. Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “If no petitioner remains in the inter partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written decision under section 318(a).” Toyota is the sole petitioner in this review. The Board has discretion to terminate this review with respect to AVS as Patent Owner.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,738,697
  • PTAB · Mar 28, 2014 · IPR2013-00413 · APJ Barbara A Parvis · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the joint motion and terminated IPR2013-00413 as to Toyota and AVS without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “chapter shall be terminated with respect to any petitioner upon the joint request of the petitioner and patent owner, unless the Office has decided the merits of the proceeding before the request for termination is filed.” The requirement for terminating review with respect to Petitioner is met. Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(a), “If no petitioner remains in the inter partes review, the Office may terminate the review or proceed to a final written decision under section 318(a).” Toyota is the sole petitioner in this review. The Board has discretion to terminate this review with respect to AVS as Patent Owner.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 6,738,697
  • PTAB · Mar 26, 2014 · IPR2014-00226 · APJ Howard B Blankenship · IPR · Order

    The Board granted the parties’ joint motion and terminated the proceeding as to both parties without a final written decision.

    RulingsOther
    • PTAB / AIA Trials › Other PTAB motions (exclude, strike, seal, additional discovery, rehearing)Granted

      “On March 14, 2014, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate the instant proceeding pursuant to a settlement agreement. Paper 7. The parties also filed a true copy of their written settlement agreement, made in connection with the termination of the instant proceeding, in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b). Ex. 1025. Additionally, the parties submitted a joint request to have their settlement agreement treated as confidential business information under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(c). Paper 8.” slip op. at 2

    None
    Patents in suitUS 7,897,919

Holdings, summaries, rulings, issues, outcomes, winners and claim constructions shown for a decision were generated by a large language model reading the opinion. They are a guide to the decision, not the decision. Confirm every one against the court's own text before relying on it. Outcomes read from the patent owner’s side. Party names are extracted from the decision and are missing on about 900 short Director denials and scans, which carry the trial number instead.