throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 8
`Entered: April 22, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INNOPHARMA LICENSING, INC., INNOPHARMA LICENSING LLC,
`INNOPHARMA INC., INNOPHARMA LLC,
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., and MYLAN INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD., BAUSCH & LOMB, INC., and
`BAUSCH & LOMB PHARMA HOLDINGS CORP.,
`Patent Owner.
`_________________________
`
`Case IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00903 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)1
`________________________
`
`Before FRANCISCO C. PRATS, ERICA A. FRANKLIN, and
`GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues common to both cases; therefore, we issue a
`single order to be entered in each case. The parties are authorized to use this
`style heading when filing an identical paper in both proceedings, provided
`that such heading includes a footnote attesting that “the word-for-word
`identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the heading.”
`
`

`

`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)
`
`
`Petitioner (“InnoPharma Licensing”) filed motions seeking to join
`IPR2015-00902 and IPR2015-00903 with, respectively, IPR2014-01043 and
`IPR2014-01041 (“the related reviews”).2 The related reviews were initiated
`by a different Petitioner (“Metrics”). This Order addresses the briefing
`schedule relating to the Motions for Joinder, and modifies the Order entered
`April 17, 2015. Paper 9, Paper 7.3
`Based on information provided by counsel for Patent Owner
`(“Senju”), the Board extends to May 26, 2015, Senju’s time for filing an
`Opposition to InnoPharma Licensing’s Motions for Joinder. See Appendix
`(copy of email transmissions between the Board and the parties).
`That Opposition shall be a paper filed separately from Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response, which is also due for filing on May 26, 2015. That
`Opposition shall include Senju’s position on InnoPharma Licensing’s
`Proposed Scheduling Order, which is due for filing on May 19, 2015.
`In addition, the Board authorizes InnoPharma Licensing to file a
`Consolidated Reply Brief, in all four proceedings, that addresses both
`Senju’s and Metrics’ Oppositions to Joinder (as both Oppositions are now
`due on May 26, 2015). The time for filing that Consolidated Reply Brief
`hereby is set for June 9, 2015. The Consolidated Reply Brief shall be
`limited to ten (10) pages in length.
`
`
`2 The Motion for Joinder in IPR2015-00902 is Paper 3. The Motion for
`Joinder in IPR2015-00903 was filed as Exhibit 0 in that proceeding.
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper numbers refer to IPR2015-00902 and IPR2015-00903 in sequence.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)
`
`
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Senju’s time for filing an Opposition to InnoPharma
`
`Licensing’s Motions for Joinder is extended to May 26, 2015;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Senju’s Opposition shall be a paper filed
`separately from Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, which is also due on
`May 26, 2015;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Senju’s Opposition shall include Senju’s
`position on InnoPharma Licensing’s Proposed Scheduling Order, which is
`due for filing on May 19, 2015;
`FURTHER ORDERED that InnoPharma Licensing is authorized to
`file a Consolidated Reply Brief, in all four proceedings, that addresses both
`Senju’s and Metrics’ Oppositions to Joinder;
`FURTHER ORDERED that InnoPharma Licensing’s time for filing
`the Consolidated Reply Brief is set for June 9, 2015; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that InnoPharma Licensing’s Consolidated
`Reply Brief shall be limited to ten (10) pages in length.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Patrick D. McPherson
`Vincent L. Capuano
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`PDMcPherson@duanemorris.com
`VCapuano@duanemorris.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Bryan Diner
`M. Andrew Holtman
`Justin Hasford
`Jonathan R. Stroud
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`bryan.diner@finnegan.com
`andy.holtman@finnegan.com
`justin.hasford@finnegan.com
`jonathan.stroud@finnegan.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)
`
`
`
`APPENDIX
`
`
`Counsel:  Based on the information provided by counsel, in IPR2014‐00903 
`and ‐902, the Board extends, to May 26, 2015, Senju’s time for filing an 
`Opposition to InnoPharma Licensing’s Motions for Joinder.  That Opposition 
`shall be a paper filed separately from Patent Owner’s Preliminary 
`Response, which is also due on May 26, 2015.  That Opposition shall include 
`Senju’s position on InnoPharma Licensing’s Proposed Scheduling Order, 
`which is due for filing on May 19, 2015. 
` 
`In addition, the Board authorizes InnoPharma Licensing to file a 
`Consolidated Reply Brief, in all four proceedings, that addresses both 
`Senju’s and Metrics’ Oppositions to Joinder (as both are now due on May 
`26, 2015).  The time for filing that Consolidated Reply Brief shall be set for 
`June 9, 2015.  The Consolidated Reply Brief shall be limited to ten (10) 
`pages in length.  Orders to that effect will issue shortly. 
` 
`Thank you, 
`Maria Vignone 
`Paralegal Operations Manager 
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board 
` [omitted] 
` 
` 
`From: Stroud, Jonathan [omitted]
`Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 5:27 PM
`To: Trials
`Cc: [omitted]
`Subject: Request for Filing Date Clarification: IPR2014-01041, -01043, IPR2015-00903,
`IPR2015-00902
` 
`Board,  
`  
` Counsel for Patent Owner in IPR2014-01041, IPR2014-01043, IPR2015-00903,
`IPR2015-00902 seeks clarification of today’s Order in these four cases. See, e.g,
`IPR2014-01041, Paper 31. In it, the Board indicated: “The time for filing of Senju’s
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,669,290 B2)
`IPR2015-00902 (Patent 8,129,431 B2)
`
`Oppositions to the Motions for Joinder remains April 19, 2015. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.25(a)(1).”  
`  
` However, during the conference call of April 15, 2015, Judge Obermann indicated that
`the preliminary response would include any opposition to joinder. See, e.g., IPR2014-
`01041, EX2026.  
`  
`
` 
`
`  
` Subsequently during the call, Judge Obermann decided to move the Patent Owner
`Preliminary Response date to May 26, 2015. Given that the Order was entered on April
`17, 2015, counsel for Senju seeks clarification as to when they should include their
`opposition to the motion for joinder and whether, like Metrics, the Patent Owner’s
`opposition to the joinder motion should be due on May 26, 2015.  
`  
` Thank you,  
`
` 
`Jonathan Stroud
`[omitted]
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket