throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 59
`
`
` Entered: June 21, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`LUPIN LTD., LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., INNOPHARMA
`LICENSING, INC., INNOPHARMA LICENSING LLC, INNOPHARMA
`INC., INNOPHARMA LLC, MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., and
`MYLAN INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`v.
`
`SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01097 (Patent 8,754,131 B2)1
`Case IPR2015-01100 (Patent 8,927,606 B1)2
` Case IPR2015-01105 (Patent 8,871,813 B2)3
`____________
`
`Before FRANCISCO C. PRATS, ERICA A. FRANKLIN, and
`GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION4
`Denying Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Exhibit 1181
`37 C.F.R. § 42.14
`INTRODUCTION
`
`I.
`
`
`
` 1
`
` Case IPR2016-00089 has been joined with this proceeding.
`2 Case IPR2016-00091 has been joined with this proceeding.
`3 Case IPR2016-00090 has been joined with this proceeding.
`4 This Decision relates to and shall be filed in each referenced case.
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01097 (Patent 8,754,131 B2)
`IPR2015-01100 (Patent 8,927,606 B1)
`IPR2015-01105 (Patent 8,871,813 B2)
`
`
`In each of the captioned proceedings, Petitioners filed a Motion to
`
`Seal the transcript of the deposition of Ivan T. Hofmann taken in IPR2015-
`
`00902 and IPR015-00903 (Ex. 1181). Paper 505 (“Mot.”).
`
`For the reasons described in the following discussion, we deny
`
`without prejudice Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Exhibit 1181.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`
`“There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in a
`
`quasi-judicial administrative proceeding open to the public, especially in an
`
`inter partes review which determines the patentability of claims in an issued
`
`patent and therefore affects the rights of the public.” Garmin Int’l v. Cuozzo
`
`Speed Techs., LLC, IPR2012-00001, slip op. at 1–2 (PTAB Mar. 14, 2013)
`
`(Paper 34). A motion to seal may be granted for good cause. 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.54. The moving party bears the burden of showing that there is good
`
`cause for the relief requested, including why the information is appropriate
`
`to be filed under seal. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20, 42.54. The Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide notes that 37 C.F.R. § 42.54 identifies confidential
`
`information in a manner consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
`
`26(c)(1)(G), which provides for protective orders for trade secret or other
`
`confidential research, development, or commercial information. 77 Fed.
`
`Reg. at 48,760. Until a motion to seal is decided, documents filed with the
`
`motion shall be sealed provisionally. 37 C.F.R. § 42.14.
`
`
`
` 5
`
` Petitioners state the “word-for-word” identical paper was filed in each
`captioned proceeding. Paper and Exhibit numbers are the same in each of
`those proceeding.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01097 (Patent 8,754,131 B2)
`IPR2015-01100 (Patent 8,927,606 B1)
`IPR2015-01105 (Patent 8,871,813 B2)
`
`
`Petitioners assert, “It is Petitioners’ understanding that this document
`
`has been designated by Patent Owner as Protective Order Material or Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 615 Materials.” Mot. 1. We have no record of that designation.
`
`Petitioner cites only to the “Proposed Stipulated Protective Orders.” Id.
`
`Exhibit 1181, however, is not cited in any previous motion to seal or
`
`proposed protective order. Petitioners’ motion fails to characterize what
`
`portion of the exhibit is deemed confidential and why. In other words,
`
`Petitioners, as the moving party, have failed their burden of showing that
`
`there is good cause for the relief requested. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20, 42.54.
`
`Indeed, Petitioner states that it “makes no assertion as to whether or not
`
`[Exhibit 1181] may contain confidential information.” Id.
`
`Moreover, a protective order has not been entered in the captioned
`
`proceedings and an acceptable proposed protective order has not been filed.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Exhibit 1181 is
`
`denied without prejudice. We exercise our discretion to maintain
`
`Exhibit 1181 under a provisional seal, in the manner requested, through July
`
`31, 2016, to allow time for a party to file motion to seal the exhibit, showing
`
`good cause for the relief requested, after a protective order is entered in this
`
`proceeding, and/or to withdraw the provisionally sealed exhibit.
`
`In accordance with the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that the Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Exhibit 1181 is denied
`
`without prejudice;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit 1181 shall remain provisionally
`
`sealed until further notice by the Board;
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01097 (Patent 8,754,131 B2)
`IPR2015-01100 (Patent 8,927,606 B1)
`IPR2015-01105 (Patent 8,871,813 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED a party may file a revised or new motion to
`
`seal and/or withdraw provisionally sealed Exhibit 1181 on or before July 31,
`
`2016; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that any opposition to a revised or new
`
`motion to seal shall be filed within 5 business days after the filing of the
`
`motion.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01097 (Patent 8,754,131 B2)
`IPR2015-01100 (Patent 8,927,606 B1)
`IPR2015-01105 (Patent 8,871,813 B2)
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS:
`
`Deborah Yellin
`DYellin@crowell.com
`
`Jonathan Lindsay
`JLindsay@crowell.com
`
`Teresa Rea
`trea@crowell.com
`
`Jitendra Malik
`jitty.malik@alston.com
`
`Bryan Skelton
`bryan.skelton@alston.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Bryan Diner
`bryan.diner@finnegan.com
`
`Justin Hasford
`justin.hasford@finnegan.com
`
`Joshua Goldberg
`joshua.goldberg@finnegan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

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