`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS V LLC;
`HAYMAN CREDES MASTER FUND, L.P.;
`HAYMAN ORANGE FUND SPC – PORTFOLIO A;
`HAYMAN CAPITAL MASTER FUND, L.P.;
`HAYMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P.;
`HAYMAN OFFSHORE MANAGEMENT, INC.;
`HAYMAN INVESTMENTS, LLC;
`NXN PARTNERS, LLC;
`IP NAVIGATION GROUP, LLC;
`J KYLE BASS; and ERICH SPANGENBERG,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BIOGEN MA INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________________________________________
`
`Case: IPR2015-01993
`U.S. Patent No. 8,399,514
`____________________________________________
`
`BIOGEN’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01993
`Patent 8,399,514
`Patent Owner Biogen MA Inc. respectfully requests oral argument in
`
`IPR2015-01993 under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a) and pursuant to the Joint Stipulation
`
`(Paper 44) moving Due Date 4 from October 26, 2016, to November 2, 2016.
`
`Pursuant to the Scheduling Orders of March 22, 2016 (Paper 21), and April 16,
`
`2016 (Paper 34), as well as the Order of October 25, 2016 (Paper 56), oral
`
`argument is currently scheduled for November 30, 2016. Oral argument will focus
`
`on the instituted grounds of unpatentability for claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,399,514 (Paper 20). The principal issues to be argued will include:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Biogen’s entitlement to the February 8, 2007 filing date of U.S.
`
`Provisional Application No. 60/888,921 (Ex. 1012).
`
`The disqualification of Joshi ’999 (Ex. 1030) as prior art under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 103(c)(1).
`
`The patentability of claims 1-20 over the prior art relied upon in
`
`Grounds 1-3 of the Institution Decision under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
`
`Biogen’s objective evidence of nonobviousness.
`
`The improper new arguments and evidence concerning alleged
`
`obviousness contained in Petitioner’s Reply to Biogen’s Opposition
`
`(Paper 46) and Dr. Pleasure’s declaration (Ex. 1045) that are outside
`
`the scope of a proper reply in violation of 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b).
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01993
`Patent 8,399,514
`(Time permitting) The unavailability of Kappos 2006 (Ex. 1003A) as
`
`
`
`prior art based on Dr. O’Neill’s conception of the invention by
`
`February 19, 2004, and Biogen’s diligence from before May 30, 2006,
`
`until February 8, 2007.
`
`
`
`Any additional issues raised by Petitioner in a request for oral
`
`argument, a motion to exclude (if any), or any other motion or paper
`
`filed by Petitioner before oral argument.
`
`Biogen requests the ability to use audio-visual equipment to display
`
`demonstrative exhibits, including a projector and screen to display PowerPoint
`
`slides. If this request for oral hearing is granted, Biogen will direct its requests for
`
`audio-visual equipment to Trials@uspto.gov.
`
`Biogen requests to reserve a portion of its allotted twenty minutes to respond
`
`to any arguments presented by Petitioner.
`
`Dated: November 2, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /Michael J. Flibbert /
`
`
`Michael J. Flibbert, Reg. No. 33,234
`Maureen D. Queler, Reg. No. 61,879
`Erin M. Sommers, Reg. No. 60,974
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett
` & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20001-4413
`(202) 408-4000
`Counsel for Patent Owner in
`IPR2015-01993
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01993
`Patent 8,399,514
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing BIOGEN’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 was served
`
`electronically via e-mail on November 2, 2016, in its entirety on the following:
`
`James T. Carmichael
`Carol A. Spiegel
`Carmichael IP, PLLC
`8000 Towers Crescent Drive, 13th Floor
`Tysons Corner, VA 22182
`jim@carmichaelip.com
`carol@carmichaelip.com
`
`Petitioner has agreed to electronic service.
`
`By: / Maureen D. Queler /
`Maureen D. Queler
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: November 2, 2016
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
