Rein Tech, Inc.

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Sep 1, 2020

IPR2020-00098 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 1, 2020)

Trials@uspto.gov Paper No. 15
571-272-7822 Entered: September 1, 2020

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

MUELLER SYSTEMS, LLC,
Petitioner,

v.

REIN TECH, INC.,
Patent Owner.
____________

IPR2020-00098
Patent 9,297,150 B2
____________

Before CARL M. DEFRANCO JR., TIMOTHY J. GOODSON, and
ALYSSA A. FINAMORE, Administrative Patent Judges.

DEFRANCO, Administrative Patent Judge.

JUDGMENT
Granting Request for Adverse Judgment Post-Institution
37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)
and
Lifting Stay of Ex Parte Reexamination Control No. 90/014,354
35 U.S.C. § 315(d); 37 C.F.R. § 42.122(a)
Rein Tech, Inc. (“Rein Tech”) is the owner of U.S. Patent No.
9,297,150 B2 (“the ’150 patent”). On October 29, 2019, Mueller Systems,
Inc. (“Mueller”) filed a Petition for inter partes review of claims 8, 12, 15,
IPR2020-00098
Patent 9,297,150 B2

2
17, 20, 21, 23, and 26 of the ’150 patent.1 Paper 3 (“Pet.”). On May 12,
2020, we instituted inter partes review as to all the claims challenged in the
Petition. See Paper 11. Upon institution of trial, we stayed an ex parte
reexamination of the ’150 patent filed by Rein Tech—Ex Parte
Reexamination Control No. 90/014,354—pending resolution or termination
of this inter partes review proceeding. See Paper 13 (finding good cause
exists to stay the parallel reexamination proceeding).
Rein Tech now requests that adverse judgment be entered “under 37
C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2)” with respect to “the claims at issue in this proceeding
only.” Paper 14 (“Request for Adverse Judgment”).2 The claims at issue in
this proceeding are the same ones challenged in the Petition—claims 8, 12,
15, 17, 20, 21, 23, and 26 of the ’150 patent.
Pursuant to the provision under which Rein Tech requests adverse
judgment—37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2)—a patent owner may request judgment
against itself “at any time during a proceeding” based on “[c]ancellation or
disclaimer of a claim such that the party has no remaining claim in the trial.”
Here, we understand Rein Tech’s request for adverse judgment to include a
request for cancellation of all the challenged patent claims such that no
claims remain for trial. See Paper 14. Because no patent claims will remain
for trial, the entry of final judgment adverse to Rein Tech is appropriate.
Also, because our entry of adverse judgment terminates this proceeding, we
lift the stay of the concurrent ex parte reexamination of the ’150 patent. In

1 Mueller’s parent company, Mueller Water Products, Inc., is also identified
as a real party-in-interest. Pet. 2.
2 Mueller did not file an opposition to Rein Tech’s request, and the deadline
for any opposition has passed.
IPR2020-00098
Patent 9,297,150 B2

3
that regard, we remind Rein Tech that “[a] patent applicant or owner is
precluded from taking action inconsistent with the adverse judgment,
including obtaining in any patent . . . [a] claim that is not patentably distinct
from a finally refused or canceled claim.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3).
ORDER
Accordingly, it is:
ORDERED that Patent Owner Rein Tech’s request for adverse
judgment is granted;
FURTHER ORDERED that judgment against Rein Tech, pursuant to
37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(2), is entered;
FURTHER ORDERED that claims 8, 12, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, and 26 of
U.S. Patent No. 9,297,150 B2 are cancelled;
FURTHER ORDERED that this constitutes a Final Written Decision
under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a);
FURTHER ORDERED that the stay of Reexamination Control
No. 90/014,354 is lifted;
FURTHER ORDERED that, no later than one week after entry of this
Order, Rein Tech shall file a notice and copy of this Judgment in the files of
Ex Parte Reexamination Control No. 90/014,354, as well as the files of any
pending applications or other proceedings or actions involving U.S. Patent
No. 9,297,150 B2; and
FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3),
Rein Tech shall not take any action inconsistent with this Judgment,
including obtaining or maintaining any patent claim that is not patentably
distinct from the cancelled claims in this proceeding.

IPR2020-00098
Patent 9,297,150 B2

4
For PETITIONER:

Coby Nixon
TAYLOR ENGLISH DUMA LLP
cnixon@taylorenglish.com

For PATENT OWNER:

Michael Klicpera
PATENT TECHNOLOGY, LLC
Debonair7@att.net

Peter Corcoran
CORCORAN IP LAW PLLC
peter@corcoranip.com