`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 33
`
` Entered: December 9, 2015
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS VI, LLC,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CELGENE CORPORATION,
`
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-01092 (Patent 6,045,501)
`Case IPR2015-01096 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01102 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01103 (Patent 6,315,720)1
`____________
`
`
`Before MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, MICHAEL W. KIM, GRACE KARAFFA
`OBERMANN, and TINA E. HULSE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues common to all identified cases. We exercise
`our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not
`authorized to use this style heading.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01092 (Patent 6,045,501)
`Case IPR2015-01096 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01102 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01103 (Patent 6,315,720)
`
`
`An initial conference call in the above proceedings was held on
`December 1, 2015, among respective counsel for Petitioner and Patent
`Owner, and Judges Tierney, Kim, Obermann and Hulse. The purpose of the
`call was to discuss any proposed changes to the Scheduling Order and any
`motions the parties intend to file. Neither party filed a list of proposed
`motions prior to the call.
`During the call, Petitioner requested authorization to file a motion to
`submit supplemental information under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Specifically,
`Petitioner seeks authorization to file two sets of supplemental information.
`The first set comprises three additional references that attempt to
`demonstrate the public availability of two documents relied upon previously
`by Petitioner. The second set comprises four references that attempt to
`demonstrate the public availability of another three documents relied upon
`previously by Petitioner. Patent Owner requested an opportunity to review
`the two sets of additional references to determine whether or not they would
`oppose Patent Owner’s motion to submit them as supplemental information.
`Based upon the discussions during the conference call, Petitioner
`agreed to provide copies of the two sets of references to Patent Owner prior
`to filing any motion to submit supplemental information. Patent Owner
`agreed to inform Petitioner whether or not they opposed the filing of the first
`and second set of references. Petitioner agreed to indicate on the first page
`of its motion to submit supplemental information whether Patent Owner
`opposes the filing of the motion. Additionally, no time was set for filing the
`motion as the parties agreed to work together to resolve any issues and
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01092 (Patent 6,045,501)
`Case IPR2015-01096 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01102 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01103 (Patent 6,315,720)
`
`indicated a preference for a flexible timeframe for reviewing the documents
`and filing the motion.
`PETITIONER:
`
`Sarah Spires
`Skiermont Puckett LLP
`sarah.spires@skiermontpuckett.com
`1102CFAD6@skiermontpuckett.com
`
`Ki O
`Skiermont Puckett LLP
`ki.o@skiermontpuckett.com
`
`Parvathi Kota
`Skiermont Puckett LLP
`1092CFAD6@skiermontpuckett.com
`
`Paul Skiermont
`Skiermont Puckett LLP
`paul.skiermont@skiermontpuckett.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Francis Cerrito
`Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
`nickcerrito@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Eric C. Stops
`ericstops@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Frank C. Calvosa
`frankcalvosa@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Anthony Insogna
`Jones Day
`aminsogna@jonesday.com
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01092 (Patent 6,045,501)
`Case IPR2015-01096 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01102 (Patent 6,315,720)
`Case IPR2015-01103 (Patent 6,315,720)
`
`
`J. Patrick Elsevier
`jpelsevier@jonesday.com
`
`Gasper J. LaRosa
`gjlarosa@jonesday.com
`
`
`4
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
