`571-272-7822
`
`
`
` Paper 25
`
`Entered: October 23, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS II LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NPS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2015-00990 and IPR2015-01093
`(Patent 7,056,886 B2)1
`_______________
`
`Before LORA M. GREEN, JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, and
`SHERIDAN K. SNEDDEN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`SNEDDEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Patent Owner’s Request for Rehearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.71
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues that are the same in the identified cases. We
`exercise our discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The parties
`are authorized to use this style heading when filing a single paper in each
`proceeding, provided that such heading includes a footnote attesting that “the
`word-for-word identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the
`heading.”
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00990 and IPR2015-01093
`Patent 7,056,886 B2
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc., (“Patent Owner”) filed a Motion for
`Additional Discovery (“Motion”) from Coalition for Affordable Drugs II LLC
`(“Petitioner”) regarding whether the Petitions at issue should have identified
`additional parties (i.e., other “Funders”) as being real parties-in-interest.
`IPR2015-00990, Paper 9; IPR2015-01093, Paper 8 (“Mot.”). We granted, in
`part, Patent Owner’s Motion authorizing
`additional discovery only as to any agreements, in the
`possession of Petitioner, relating to the control or ability to
`control any aspect of the current proceeding by a party not
`designated as Petitioner or a real party-in-interest in the
`Petition. Such agreements include those indicating that any
`person or party (other than Petitioner or designated real parties-
`in-interest) provided direction to, or had the authority to
`provide direction to, Petitioner or its counsel in relation to this
`proceeding, including persons or parties who reviewed, or were
`given the opportunity to review, papers filed in this proceeding.
`IPR2015-00990, Paper 14; IPR2015-01093, Paper 13 (“Order”).
`Patent Owner filed a request for rehearing of the Order. (Paper 15,
`“Request”). The request for rehearing is denied.
`ANALYSIS
`When rehearing an interlocutory decision, a panel will review the
`decision for an abuse of discretion. 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(b). Patent Owner’s
`Request does not set forth any argument attempting to establish that we
`abused our discretion. Rather, Patent Owner merely requests that we broaden
`the scope of additional discovery to include agreements related to the funding
`of the current proceeding and reargues positions set forth in its Motion.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00990 and IPR2015-01093
`Patent 7,056,886 B2
`
`
`Patent Owner has not carried its burden of demonstrating that the
`Board’s decision limiting additional discovery to agreements relevant to the
`control of these proceedings constitutes an abuse of discretion.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that Patent
`Owner’s request for rehearing is denied.
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Jeffrey D. Blake
`Matthew L. Fedowitz
`MERCHANT & GOULD P.C.
`jblake@merchantgould.com
`mfedowitz@merchantgould.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joseph R. Robinson
`Heather Morehouse Ettinger
`Dustin B. Weeks
`TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
`joseph.robinson@troutmansanders.com
`heather.ettinger@troutmansanders.com
`dustin.weeks@troutmansanders.com
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
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
