`Case No. IPR2015-00644
`Case No. IPR2015-00830
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.
`
`Patent Owner
`____________________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-00643 (8,232,250 B2)
`Case No. IPR2015-00644 (8,399,413 B2)
`Case No. IPR2015-00830 (8,969,302 B2)1
`____________________________
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT
`
`
`1 This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission addresses all above referenced cases.
`
`The word-for-word identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the
`
`caption.
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested
`
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Mylan”) hereby respectfully requests that the
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) admit David L. Anstaett pro hac vice
`
`
`
`in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`Patent Owner has stated it will not oppose this motion.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts Showing Good Cause for the Board to Recognize
`Counsel Pro Hac Vice During the Proceeding
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may admit counsel pro hac vice for
`
`good cause, so long as lead counsel is a registered practitioner and subject to any
`
`other conditions the Board requires. Under Section 42.10(c), good cause includes
`
`when “counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.” This motion
`
`satisfies the requirements of Section 42.10(c):
`
`1.
`
`Lead counsel, Jeffrey Guise, is a registered practitioner.
`
`2. Mr. Anstaett is an experienced litigator and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue here, as shown in his accompanying
`
`October 8, 2015 Declaration (“Anstaett Decl.”), attached hereto. That declaration
`
`shows that Mr. Anstaett has been a litigator for 11 years. He is a member in good
`
`standing of the State Courts of Virginia and Wisconsin, and is also admitted in
`
`numerous federal courts. He is also familiar with the subject matter of this case,
`
`including U.S. Patent No. 8,232,250, U.S. Patent No. 8,399,413, and U.S. Patent
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`No. 8,969,302 (the ’250, ’413 and ’302 patents, respectively), the patents’
`
`prosecution histories, the underlying technology, and the prior art cited by the
`
`petitioner in this matter. Anstaett Decl. ¶¶ 8-9.
`
`3.
`
`In his declaration, Mr. Anstaett also attests to each of the listed items
`
`required by the Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission –37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10 in IPR2013-00639. Anstaett Decl. ¶¶ 2-13.
`
`III. Conclusion
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Mylan respectfully requests that the Board admit
`
`David L. Anstaett pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`/Brandon M. White/
`Brandon M. White
`Reg. No. 52,354
`
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`700 13th Street, NW, Suite 600
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`Telephone: (202) 654-6204
`Facsimile: (202) 654-6211
`Email: bmwhite@perkinscoie.com
`
`Attorneys for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`
`Dated: October 8, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Case No. IPR2015-00643
`Case No. IPR2015-00644
`Case No. IPR2015-00830
`
`
`____________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.
`
`Patent Owner
`____________________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-00643 (8,232,250 B2)
`Case No. IPR2015-00644 (8,399,413 B2)
`Case No. IPR2015-00830 (8,969,302 B2)1
`____________________________
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
`FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT
`
`
`1 This Declaration of David L. Anstaett In Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission addresses all above referenced cases. The word-for-word identical
`
`paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the caption.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I, David L. Anstaett, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`I am a litigation partner at Perkins Coie LLP.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the Commonwealth of
`
`Virginia and the State of Wisconsin. I am also admitted to practice before the
`
`United States Courts of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, D.C. Circuit and Federal
`
`Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court.
`
`3. My Bar membership numbers are VA 46614 and WI 1037884.
`
`4.
`
`I have been practicing law for 14 years, including litigating patent
`
`cases for the last 11 years.
`
`5. More generally, I represent Mylan in litigating significant
`
`pharmaceutical patent cases, including the following infringement cases:
`
`•
`
`AstraZeneca AB et al. v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd., Civil Action No.
`
`3:12-cv-01378-MLC-TJB (U.S. District Court for the District of New
`
`Jersey, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)
`
`•
`
`Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
`
`et al., Civil Action No.1:09-cv-08824-WHP (U.S. District Court for
`
`the Southern District of New York, U.S. Court of Appeals for the
`
`Federal Circuit, U.S. Supreme Court)
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`•
`
`Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
`
`et al., No. 10-cv-7246 (KBF) (U.S. District Court for the Southern
`
`District of New York)
`
`•
`
`•
`
`Apotex, Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-
`
`03695 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois)
`
`AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP v. Agila Specialties Inc. et al, Civil
`
`Action No. 1:15-cv-06039-RMB-KMW (U.S. District Court for the
`
`District of New Jersey)
`
`•
`
`Teva Pharmaceutical USA Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
`
`et al., Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-01278-GMS (U.S. District Court of
`
`District of Delaware)
`
`•
`
`•
`
`The Medicines Co. v. Mylan Inc., Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-01285
`
`(U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)
`
`Hospira, Inc. et al. v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell, et al., Civil Action No.
`
`8:14-cv-02662-GJH (U.S. District Court District of Maryland, U.S.
`
`Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit)
`
`6.
`
`I have never been suspended, disbarred, sanctioned or cited for
`
`contempt by any court or administrative body.
`
`7.
`
`I have never had a court deny my application for admission to
`
`practice.
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`8.
`
`I am familiar with the subject matter of this proceeding. In addition to
`
`U.S. Patent Nos. 8,232,250 (“the ’250 patent”), 8,399,413 (“the ’413 patent”), and
`
`8,969,302 (“the ’302 patent”) and their prosecution histories, I am familiar with the
`
`technology at issue and with Copaxone, the pharmaceutical product for which the
`
`’250, ’413 and ’302 patents are listed in the Orange Book. I have been litigating
`
`issues surrounding Copaxone since 2009. I was counsel in a long-running case
`
`involving patents related to Copaxone, Teva v. Mylan, No. 1:09-cv-08824-WHP
`
`(S.D.N.Y.) and a litigation related to markers for measuring the molecular weight
`
`of glatiramer acetate, Teva v. Mylan, No. 10-cv-7246 (KBF) (S.D.N.Y.). In
`
`addition, I am counsel in the following pending district court cases related to
`
`methods of treatment with Copaxone:
`
`•
`
`Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`et al., Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-01278-GMS (U.S. District Court for
`
`the District of Delaware); and
`
`•
`
`Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`et al., Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-00167-IMK (U.S. District Court for
`
`the Northern District of West Virginia).
`
`9.
`
`In connection with my work on Copaxone litigations, I have become
`
`familiar with the prior art references that are the subject of this proceeding.
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`10. Given my familiarity with the underlying facts and my litigation
`
`experience with the Federal Rules of Evidence, I have experience and expertise
`
`important to representing Mylan’s interests in this matter.
`
`11.
`
`I have read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of 37
`
`C.F.R.
`
`12.
`
`I agree to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R.§§ 11.101 et. seq. and
`
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`13.
`
`I have not previously applied for admission pro hac vice before the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office.
`
`14.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own
`
`knowledge are true and that all statements made on information and belief are
`
`believed to be true; and further that these statements are made with the knowledge
`
`that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine, imprisonment, or
`
`both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`
`
`Dated: October 8, 2015
`
`
`
`
`/s/ David L. Anstaett
`David L. Anstaett
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing:
`
`1. MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT,
`and
`
`2.
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
`FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF DAVID L. ANSTAETT
`
`was served electronically via email as follows:
`
`Patent Owners:
`
`Elizabeth Holland
`Goodwin Procter LLP
`eholland@goodwinprocter.com
`
`William James
`Goodwin Procter LLP
`wjames@goodwinprocter.com
`
`Eleanor Yost
`Goodwin Procter LLP
`eyost@goodwinprocter.com
`
`
`
`/Brandon M. White/
`Brandon M. White
`
`Attorney for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 8, 2015