`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 23
` April 13, 2015
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`PHIGENIX, INC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`IMMUNOGEN, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00676
`Patent 8,337,856 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00676
`Patent 8,337,856 B2
`
`
`In e-mail correspondence with Board personnel on April 11, 2015, Petitioner
`requested an additional ten (10) pages for Petitioner’s Reply Brief, for a total of
`twenty-five (25) pages, consistent with United States Patent & Trademark Office
`Director Michelle K. Lee’s recent blog posting outlining rule adjustments for
`America Invents Act trial proceedings.1 In the same e-mail correspondence, also
`sent to counsel for Patent Owner, Petitioner indicated that Patent Owner does not
`oppose the request.
`It is
`ORDERED that the page limit for Petitioner’s Reply Brief is increased to
`twenty-five (25) pages in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`1 http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_s_quick_fixes_for
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00676
`Patent 8,337,856 B2
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`
`Ping Wang
`PingWang@andrewskurth.com
`
`Gregory Porter
`GregPorter@andrewskurth.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`
`Eldora Ellison
`eellison-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`Eric Steffe
`esteffe-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`