`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 62
`Entered: March 15, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. and
`AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS LLC,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00643 (Patent 8,232,250 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00644 (Patent 8,399,413 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00830 (Patent 8,969,302 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`Before ZHENYU YANG and TINA E. HULSE, Administrative Patent
`Judges.
`
`YANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Petitioners’ Motion to Seal
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14
`
`
`
`1 Cases IPR2015-01976, IPR2015-01980, and IPR2015-01981 have been
`joined with IPR2015-00643, IPR2015-00644, and IPR2015-00830,
`respectively.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00643 (Patent 8,232,250 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00644 (Patent 8,399,413 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00830 (Patent 8,969,302 B2)
`
`
`Petitioners filed a Motion to Seal portions of the Declaration of
`
`Professor Joel Hay, Exhibit 1099 (“Hay Declaration”). Paper 57, 1.2
`
`Petitioners represent that Patent Owner does not oppose the Motion. Id. at 2.
`
`Petitioners’ Motion is granted.
`
`According to Petitioners, the Hay Declaration contains references to
`
`information we previously determined, on Patent Owner’s motion, good
`
`cause exists to seal. Id. at 1 (citing Paper 52). Petitioners represent that the
`
`Hay Declaration also contains references to the deposition of Dr. Grabowski
`
`(Ex. 2148) filed under seal by Patent Owner. Id. (citing Paper 54). In the
`
`concurrently issued Decision on Patent Owner’s Motion to Seal, we have
`
`determined that Patent Owner has shown good cause for sealing the
`
`confidential, proprietary data contained in Exhibit 2148. Paper 60.
`
`Petitioners represent that “[u]pon conferring with Patent Owner, a
`
`redacted version of the Hay Declaration will be filed with only previously-
`
`sealed material redacted.” Paper 57, 2.
`
`Upon considering the content of the Hay Declaration, we determine
`
`that good cause exists for sealing the previously-sealed material contained in
`
`the Hay Declaration.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2 For ease of reference, paper numbers and exhibits cited in this Decision
`refer to those filed in IPR2015-00643. Similar papers and exhibits were
`filed in the other proceedings.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00643 (Patent 8,232,250 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00644 (Patent 8,399,413 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00830 (Patent 8,969,302 B2)
`
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion to Seal is GRANTED.
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a public version of Exhibit 1099, with
`
`only previously-sealed material redacted, shall be filed within five business
`
`days of this Order.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00643 (Patent 8,232,250 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00644 (Patent 8,399,413 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00830 (Patent 8,969,302 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Jeffrey Guise
`jguise@wsgr.com
`
`Brandon White
`BMWhite@perkinscoie.com
`
`Richard Torczon
`rtorczon@wsgr.com
`
`Shannon Bloodworth
`SBloodworth@perkinscoie.com
`
`David Anstaett
`DAnstaett@perkinscoie.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Elizabeth Holland
`eholland@goodwinprocter.com
`
`William James
`wjames@goodwinprocter.com
`
`Eleanor Yost
`eyost@goodwinprocter.com
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`