`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`
`
`PHARMACOSMOS A/S
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`LUITPOLD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Cases1 IPR2015-01490; Patent 7,754,702 B2
`
`
`IPR2015-01493; Patent 8,431,549 B2
`
`
`IPR2015-01495; Patent 8,895,612 B2
`
`____________________________________________________________
`
`Petitioner’s Objection to Patent Owner Response in Lieu of Motion
`(to Patent Owner Response in Lieu of Motion, Paper 9)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 As required by Paper 8, Petitioner attests that the word-for-word identical paper is
`being filed in each proceeding identified in the heading.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01490; IPR2015-01493; IPR2015-01495
`
`
`
`The Board gave Patent Owner permission to submit a motion requesting
`
`authorization to file a certificate of correction to change “103” to “103” in claim 26
`
`of US Patent No. 7,754,702, and in claim 12 of US Patent No. 8,895,612 by
`
`October 20, 2015. However, the Patent Owner instead filed a “Response in Lieu of
`
`Motion” (“Response”), electing not to file a motion requesting a certificate of
`
`correction.
`
`Since Patent Owner chose not to file a motion, Patent Owners’ paper
`
`couched as a “Response,” but containing argument, is inappropriate and should not
`
`have been filed. At this particular stage in the proceedings, such arguments are not
`
`permitted. As such, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board disregard the
`
`arguments made therein. In the event that the Board chooses to consider the
`
`arguments presented in the “Response,” Petitioner disagrees with Patent Owner’s
`
`statement that “Petitioner is thus not prejudiced by the Board agreeing that ‘n’ is
`
`correctly about ‘103’”. Response at 1.
`
`
`
`Moreover, and for clarity’s sake, Petitioner states that in response to Patent
`
`Owners’ inquiry received after the Board granted permission to file a motion,
`
`Petitioner indicated an inability to consent at the present time to a motion to correct
`
`(1) certain claims; and (2) a portion of the specification. This second issue was not
`
`identified to the Board as a basis for the contemplated motion. Petitioner did,
`
`Active 21313898.1
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01490; IPR2015-01493; IPR2015-01495
`
`however, express a willingness to consider a motion explaining the basis for the
`
`proposed amendments.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`
`
`/s/ Lisa Kole
`
`
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER,
`PHARMACOSMOS A/S
`
`Lisa Kole (PTO Reg. No. 35,225)
`Steven Lendaris (PTO Reg. No. 53,202)
`Paul Ragusa (PTO Reg. No. 38,587)
`
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`30 Rockefeller Plaza
`New York, NY 10112
`Telephone: (212) 408-2500
`Facsimile: (212) 408-2501
`Email: lisa.kole@bakerbotts.com
`steven.lendaris@bakerbotts.com
`paul.ragusa@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`October 30, 2015
`Date
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Active 21313898.1
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01490; IPR2015-01493; IPR2015-01495
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing paper is being served
`
`on October 30, 2015, by filing through the Patent Review Processing System and
`
`delivering a copy via email to the counsel for Patent Owner at the addresses of
`
`record:
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Lisa Kole
`
`Lisa Kole (PTO Reg. No. 35,225)
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`30 Rockefeller Plaza
`New York, NY 10112
`Telephone: (212) 408-2500
`Facsimile: (212) 408-2501
`Email: lisa.kole@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`
`
`George E. Quillin
`Michael D. Kaminski
`Foley & Lardner L.L.P
`3000 K Street, N.W., Suite 600
`Washington, D.C. 20007
`gquillin@foley.com
`mkaminski@foley.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 30, 2015
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
