`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No. 95
`Entered: April 11, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ACCORD HEALTHCARE INC., USA, ACCORD HEALTHCARE, INC.,
`INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS
`LLC, AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS OF NEW YORK, LLC,
`AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS CO. INDIA PVT. LTD., APOTEX
`CORP., APOTEX INC., DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES, LTD., DR.
`REDDY’S LABORATORIES, INC., GLENMARK GENERICS INC.,
`USA, GLENMARK GENERICS LTD., GLENMARK
`PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., PANACEA BIOTEC LTD., SUN PHARMA
`GLOBAL FZE, TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., ZYDUS
`PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD,
`LUPIN LTD., AND LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY, LIMITED AND
`UBE INDUSTRIES, LTD.,
`Patent Owners.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00864 (Patent 8,404,703 B2)1, 2
`Case IPR2015-00865 (Patent 8,569,325 B2)3
`____________
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, TINA E. HULSE, and
`CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`HULSE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are common to each case.
`2 Case IPR2015-01882 has been joined with Case IPR2015-00864.
`3 Case IPR2015-01881 has been joined with Case IPR2015-00865.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00864 (8,404,703 B2)
`IPR2015-00865 (8,569,325 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to our prior orders, oral argument is scheduled to be held in
`both IPR2015-00864 and IPR2015-00865 on May 2, 2016, if requested by
`the parties. IPR2015-00864, Paper 37; IPR2015-00865, Paper 29.
`Petitioners and Patent Owner have requested oral argument in both cases.
`IPR2015-00864, Papers 87, 88; IPR2015-00865, Paper 87, 88. The requests
`are granted.
`The oral argument will commence at 2:00 PM Eastern Time, on
`Monday, May 2, 2016, in Hearing Room A on the ninth floor of Madison
`Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
`Each party will have 45 minutes to present arguments and may
`determine for itself how to divide the time between the two cases.
`Petitioners bear the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s patent
`claims at issue are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral argument, Petitioners
`will proceed first to present its case with respect to the challenged patent
`claims and the grounds on which the Board instituted trial.4 Petitioners may
`reserve some of its argument time for rebuttal. Patent Owner will then
`respond to Petitioners’ initial presentation. Finally, Petitioners may use the
`time it has reserved to reply to Patent Owner’s presentation.
`
`
`4 As per our order joining cases IPR2015-01881 and IPR2015-01882 with
`these proceedings, we expect Petitioners to present a single argument on
`behalf of all Petitioners. See IPR2015-01881, Paper 11; IPR2015-01882,
`Paper 11.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00864 (8,404,703 B2)
`IPR2015-00865 (8,569,325 B2)
`
`
`
`
`
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the oral argument, and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the oral argument.
`The hearing transcript will be entered in the record of this proceeding. The
`oral argument will be open to the public for in-person attendance, which will
`be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis.
`The parties shall serve any demonstrative exhibits on opposing
`counsel at least five business days before the hearing. The parties shall also
`provide a courtesy copy of any demonstrative exhibits to the Board no later
`than three business days before the hearing by emailing them to
`Trials@uspto.gov. Notwithstanding 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), the parties shall
`not file any demonstrative exhibits in these proceedings without prior
`authorization from the Board.
`The parties are directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc.
`v. The Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041
`(PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate
`content of demonstrative exhibits. The parties shall confer with each other
`regarding any objections to demonstrative exhibits. For any issue that
`cannot be resolved after conferring, the parties may each file a one-page list
`of objections at least three business days before the hearing. The list should
`identify with particularity which demonstrative exhibits are subject to
`objection and include a short statement of the reason for each objection. No
`argument or further explanation is permitted.
`The Board will consider the objections and schedule a telephone
`conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will reserve ruling on
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00864 (8,404,703 B2)
`IPR2015-00865 (8,569,325 B2)
`
`
`the objections until after the oral argument. Any objection to demonstrative
`exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered waived.
`The parties are advised that at least one member of the panel will be
`attending the hearing from a remote location. The parties are reminded that
`the presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative
`exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to
`ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript and the ability of
`the judge participating remotely to follow the presenter’s arguments.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present at oral
`hearing, although any backup counsel may make the actual presentation, in
`whole or in part. If lead counsel for either party will not be in attendance at
`oral hearing, the Board should be notified via a joint telephone conference
`call no later than two business days before the oral hearing to discuss the
`matter.
`The parties may request the use of audio-visual equipment during the
`oral hearing. Formal requests are to be made five business days in advance
`of the hearing date and should be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is
`not timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00864 (8,404,703 B2)
`IPR2015-00865 (8,569,325 B2)
`
`PETITIONERS:
`Douglass Hochstetler
`KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
`dhochstetler@kelleydrye.com
`
`Samuel Park
`George Lombardi
`Maureen Rurka
`Charles Klein
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`Prasugrel-IPR@winston.com
`GLombardi@winston.com
`MRurka@winston.com
`CKlein@winston.com
`
`Patrick Gallagher
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`pcgallagher@duanemorris.com
`
`William Mentlik
`LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG,
`Krumholz & Mentlik, LLP
`WMentlik@ldlkm.com
`
`Azadeh Kokabi
`SUGHRUE MION PLLC
`akokabi@sughrue.com
`
`Steve Moore
`John Winterle
`Hans-Peter Hoffman
`Alan Gardner
`WITHERS BERGMAN LLP
`steven.moore@withersworldwide.com
`john.winterle@withersworldwide.com
`hans-peter.hoffmann@withersworldwide.com
`alan.gardner@withersworldwide.com
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00864 (8,404,703 B2)
`IPR2015-00865 (8,569,325 B2)
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Dov Grossman
`David Krinsky
`Adam Perlman
`WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
`dgrossman@wc.com
`dkrinsky@wc.com
`aperlman@wc.com
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
