throbber
Paper No. 15
`Entered: September 20, 2016
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`J. KYLE BASS and ERICH SPANGENBERG,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ALPEX PHARMA SA,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00245
`Patent 8,440,170 B2
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before TONI R. SCHEINER, LORA M. GREEN, and
`JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GREEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00245
`Patent 8,440,170 B2
`
`A conference call was held on Monday, August 29, 2016, among
`Gregory Gonsalves, counsel for Petitioner; George Snyder, counsel for
`Patent Owner; and Judges Green, Scheiner, and Bonilla. The panel
`requested the call in response to the following email sent to the Board by
`Patent Owner on Monday, August 22, 2016, reproduced below.
`
`Honorable Board Members:
`
`This is to provide notification, in conjunction with the due
`date of August 23, 2016 set in the Scheduling Order, that Patent
`Owner Alpex Pharma will not be submitting an Opposition
`(Response) to the Petition filed by Petitioners Bass and
`Spangenberg. Patent Owner stands ready, in the event the Board
`deems it necessary or advantageous, to participate in a telephone
`conference with Board personnel and counsel for Petitioners
`regarding the foregoing.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Back-up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`George B. Snyder
`
`Upon questioning by the panel, counsel for Patent Owner reiterated
`
`what was in the email, stating that Patent Owner would not be filing a
`response to the Petition in this proceeding.
`
`The Patent Owner Response was due August 23, 2016. As of the date
`of this Order, Patent Owner has not filed such a response, nor have the
`parties stipulated to a change of its due date. Thus, it is unclear whether
`Patent Owner is abandoning the contest. Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(b)(4),
`abandonment of this proceeding by Patent Owner would be viewed as a
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00245
`Patent 8,440,170 B2
`
`request for adverse judgment, and judgment would be entered against Patent
`Owner.
`Under these circumstances, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner has ten (10) business days from the
`date of this order to show cause why adverse judgment should not be entered
`against it.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner:
`
`Gregory Gonsalves
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`Silvia Salvadori
`SILVIA SALVADORI, P.C.
`silvia@salvadorilaw.com
`
`George B. Snyder
`WARE, FRESSOLA, MAGUIRE & BARBER LLP
`gbs@warefressola.com
`
` 3

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