`
`
`
`Elaine Herrmann Blais
`+1 617 570 1205
`eblais@goodwinlaw.com
`
`Goodwin Procter LLP
`100 Northern Avenue
`Boston, MA 02210
`
`goodwinlaw.com
`+1 617 570 1000
`
`
`
`April 8, 2020
`
`
`
`VIA ECF
`
`The Honorable Allison D. Burroughs
`United States District Court Judge
`John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse
`1 Courthouse Way
`Boston, MA 02210
`
`Re:
`
`Teva Pharmaceuticals Int’l GmbH et al. v. Eli Lilly and Company,
`Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-12029-ADB
`
`
`
`Dear Judge Burroughs:
`
`We write on behalf of Plaintiffs Teva Pharmaceuticals Int’l GmbH and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
`(“Teva”) to request a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference at the Court’s earliest convenience in the above-
`captioned case.1 We have conferred with counsel for Lilly, and Lilly joins this request.
`
`This case has been stayed pending resolution of nine petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) filed by
`Lilly. (ECF No. 43 at 18.) The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal
`Board (“PTAB”) has issued final written decisions in all of the IPRs concerning the patents at issue in
`this case. In particular, on March 31, 2020, the PTAB issued a final written decision determining all
`challenged claims were not unpatentable in three of the patents-in-suit2. Lilly intends to appeal that
`decision. In two separate decisions issued on February 18, 2020, the PTAB cancelled all challenged
`claims in six of the patents-in-suit3. Teva is considering appealing those decisions. In view of the
`resolution of the IPRs by the PTAB, this case is poised to proceed.
`
`Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court hold a Rule 16 scheduling conference at its
`earliest convenience so that parties may resume this case.
`
`
`
`
`
` 1
`
` The parties are, of course, mindful that the country is in the midst of a public health crisis but understand that the
`Court has been conducting civil hearings by video and teleconference.
`2 The challenged patents in these IPRs were U.S. Patent Nos. 8,586,045, 9,884,907, and 9,884,908.
`3 The challenged patents in these IPRs were U.S. Patent Nos. 9,340,614, 9,266,951, 9,890,210, 9,346,881,
`9,890,211, and 8,597,649.
`
`ACTIVE/102876338.1
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:18-cv-12029-ADB Document 44 Filed 04/08/20 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`
`
`The Honorable Allison D. Burroughs
`April 8, 2020
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Elaine Herrmann Blais
`
`Elaine Herrmann Blais
`
`
`cc: Counsel of Record (by ECF)
`
`
`
`
`
`ACTIVE/102876338.1
`
`
`
`