Pto

4
2013-1087 (Reexamination Nos. 95/001,108 and 95/001,154) 2013-1339 (Reexamination Nos. 95/000,178 and 95/001,152) 2013-1224 (Reexamination Nos. 95/001,106 & 95/001,131) 2013-1228 (Reexamination Nos. 95/000,108 & 95/001,132) ____________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT _____________________ IN RE RAMBUS INC., _________________________ Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. _________________________ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS Appellant Rambus Inc. (“Rambus”) respectfully moves the Court to dismiss the above-captioned appeals with prejudice and with all parties bearing their own costs. Rambus has settled all litigations to which the patents in these appeals were pertinent, and Rambus therefore no longer wishes to pursue these appeals. Rambus has contacted counsel for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (“PTO”), and the PTO has indicated it does not oppose dismissal of these appeals with all parties bearing their own costs. Case: 13-1224 Document: 71 Page: 1 Filed: 04/07/2014

Transcript of Pto

Page 1: Pto

2013-1087 (Reexamination Nos. 95/001,108 and 95/001,154)

2013-1339 (Reexamination Nos. 95/000,178 and 95/001,152)

2013-1224 (Reexamination Nos. 95/001,106 & 95/001,131)

2013-1228 (Reexamination Nos. 95/000,108 & 95/001,132)

____________________________

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT _____________________

IN RE RAMBUS INC.,

_________________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. _________________________

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

Appellant Rambus Inc. (“Rambus”) respectfully moves the Court to dismiss

the above-captioned appeals with prejudice and with all parties bearing their own

costs. Rambus has settled all litigations to which the patents in these appeals were

pertinent, and Rambus therefore no longer wishes to pursue these appeals.

Rambus has contacted counsel for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

(“PTO”), and the PTO has indicated it does not oppose dismissal of these appeals

with all parties bearing their own costs.

Case: 13-1224 Document: 71 Page: 1 Filed: 04/07/2014

Page 2: Pto

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, Rambus respectfully requests that

the Court dismiss the above-captioned appeals.

Dated: April 7, 2014

Respectfully submitted, /s/ James R. Barney James R. Barney Aidan C. Skoyles Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 408-4000

Case: 13-1224 Document: 71 Page: 2 Filed: 04/07/2014

Page 3: Pto

CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST

Pursuant to Federal Circuit Rules 26.1 and 47.4, counsel for Appellant Rambus Inc. certify the following: 1. The full name of every party or amicus represented by us is: Rambus Inc. 2. The name of the real party in interest (if the party named in the caption is not the real party in interest) represented by us is: Rambus Inc. 3. All parent corporations and any publicly held companies that own 10 percent or more of the stock of any party represented by us are: None 4. The names of all law firms and the partners or associates that appeared for the parties now represented by us in the trial court or are expected to appear in this court are: J. Michael Jakes, James R. Barney, Naveen Modi, Molly R. Silfen*,

Aiden Skoyles, Jason E. Stach FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP

*Ms. Silfen no longer works at Finnegan

Case: 13-1224 Document: 71 Page: 3 Filed: 04/07/2014

Page 4: Pto

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that true and correct copies of the UNOPPOSED MOTION

TO DISMISS were served upon registered counsel by operation of the Court’s

CM/ECF system on this 7th day of April, 2014.

Nathan K. Kelley Acting Solicitor Stacy B. Margolies Associate Solicitor United States Patent and Trademark Office Mail Stop 8 P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22303-1450 [email protected] [email protected]

/s/ Kay Wylie Kay Wylie

Case: 13-1224 Document: 71 Page: 4 Filed: 04/07/2014