`Tel: 571.272.7822
`
`Entered: June 2, 2016
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`GENZYME CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GENETECH, INC. AND CITY OF HOPE,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Cases IPR2016-00383
`Patent 6,331,415 B1
`_______________
`
`
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`Before LORA M. GREEN and ERICA A. FRANKLIN, Administrative
`Patent Judges.
`
`GREEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00383
`Patent 6,331,415 B1
`
`
`A conference call was held on Wednesday, June 1, 2016, among Lisa
`Ferri and Richard McCormick, counsel for Petitioner; Robert Gunther,
`Jeffrey Kushnan, David Cavanaugh, and Josh Stern, counsel for Patent
`Owner; and Administrative Patent Judges Green and Franklin. A court
`reporter was present on the call, and a transcript will be filed as an exhibit by
`Patent Owner in due course.1 Patent Owner requested the call seeking
`authorization to file a response to Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s
`Preliminary Response (“Petitioner’s Reply”) (Paper 12). Patent Owner also
`sought limited discovery, including the deposition of Petitioner’s Declarant,
`Timothy Creagan, whose declaration was submitted in support of an
`argument in Petitioner’s Reply (Ex. 1061) that Petitioner independently
`prepared its Petition that raised grounds that could not have been presented
`in an earlier petition filed by a related corporate entity, Sanofi SA.
`
`As discussed during the call, an institution decision is due in this
`proceeding on July 7, 2016. In addition, we noted that the discovery sought
`by Patent Owner was not determinative of the issue of whether we should
`decline to institute trial under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d). Thus, given the posture
`and circumstances of this proceeding, we did not authorize Patent Owner to
`file a Response to Petitioner’s Reply, and denied its request for limited
`discovery.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner is not authorized to file a response to
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response; and
`
`
`1 This order summarizes the statements made during the conference call. A
`more detailed record may be found in the transcript.
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00383
`Patent 6,331,415 B1
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request for limited
`discovery is denied.
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Richard McCormick
`Brian Nolan
`MAYER BROWN LLP
`rmccormick@mayerbrown.com
`BNolan@mayerbrown.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Heather M. Petruzzi
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
`David.Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Heather.Petruzzi@wilmerhale.com
`
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`iprnotices@sidley.com
`
`
`Adam R. Brausa
`abrausa@durietangri.com
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
