throbber
IPR2016-00460
`Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for
`Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary Response
`
`Adam R. Brausa
`Reg. No. 60,287
`Daralyn J. Durie
`Pro Hac Vice Application
`Pending
`Durie Tangri LLP
`217 Leidesdorff Street
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`
`
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`Reg. No. 43,401
`Peter S. Choi
`Reg. No. 54,033
`Sidley Austin LLP
`1501 K Street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C.
`20005
`
`
`Filed on behalf of Patent Owners Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope by:
`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Reg. No. 36,476
`Heather M. Petruzzi
`Reg. No. 71,270
`Robert J. Gunther, Jr.
`Pro Hac Vice Application
`Pending
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering
`Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________________________
`
`GENZYME CORPORATION,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`GENENTECH, INC. AND CITY OF HOPE
`Patent Owners
`____________________________________________
`
`Case IPR2016-00460
`Patent 6,331,415
`____________________________________________
`
`PATENT OWNERS’ NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
`JOINDER AND WAIVER OF PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00460
`Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for
`Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary Response
`
`
`
`Patent Owners Genentech Inc. (“Genentech”) and City of Hope submit this
`
`
`
`Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary
`
`Response to Petitioner Genzyme Corporation’s (“Genzyme”) Motion for Joinder
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(c), and 37 C.F.R. § 42.22 and § 42.122(b) (“Motion for
`
`Joinder”) (Paper 10). In view of Genzyme’s agreement to abide by the conditions
`
`set forth in its Motion for Joinder and reproduced below, Patent Owners do not
`
`oppose Genzyme’s motion to join this inter partes review with IPR2015-01624,
`
`filed by Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC (“Sanofi-Aventis”) and Regeneron
`
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) and relating to the same patent at issue here,
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,331,415 (“the Cabilly ’415 patent”). The conditions are as
`
`follows:
`
`1. Genzyme agrees to “consolidated filings for all substantive papers in
`
`the proceeding (e.g., Reply to the Patent Owner’s Response,
`
`Opposition to Motion to Amend, Motion for Observation on Cross
`
`Examination Testimony of a Reply Witness, Motion to Exclude
`
`Evidence, Opposition to Motion to Exclude Evidence and Reply)” and
`
`to “incorporate its filings with those of Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron
`
`into a consolidated filing in the Sanofi-Aventis IPR [2015-01624],
`
`including being subject to the ordinary rules for one party on page
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00460
`Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for
`Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary Response
`
`
`limits.” (Paper 10 at 6.) Genzyme further agrees that “Sanofi,
`
`Regeneron and Genzyme will be jointly responsible for the
`
`consolidated filings” with the exception for motions that do not
`
`involve the other parties. (Id. at 6, 9.)
`
`2.
`
`Genzyme agrees “not to be permitted any arguments separate from
`
`those advanced by Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron in the consolidated
`
`filings” in order to “avoid lengthy and duplicative briefing.” (Paper
`
`10 at 6.)
`
`3.
`
`Genzyme agrees that “[c]onsolidated discovery is also appropriate
`
`given that Genzyme, Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron are using the
`
`same expert declaration in the two proceedings.” Specifically,
`
`“Genzyme, Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron will designate an attorney
`
`to conduct the cross-examination of any given witness produced by
`
`Genentech and City of Hope, and the redirect of any given witness
`
`produced by Genzyme, Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron within the
`
`timeframe normally allotted by the rules for one party. Genzyme will
`
`not receive any separate cross-examination or redirect time from that
`
`of Sanofi-Aventis and Regeneron.” (Paper 10 at 6-7; see also id. at
`
`- 2 -
`
`9.)
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00460
`Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for
`Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary Response
`
`
`Genzyme agrees that “[t]he Genzyme IPR [2016-00460] will be
`
`4.
`
`instituted and joined with the Sanofi-Aventis IPR [2015-01624] on the
`
`same grounds as those for which review was instituted in the Sanofi-
`
`Aventis IPR.” (Paper 10 at 8.)
`
`5.
`
`Genzyme agrees that “[t]he scheduling order for the Sanofi-Aventis
`
`IPR will apply to the joined proceeding.” (Paper 10 at 8.)
`
`If the Board grants Genzyme’s joinder motion, Patent Owners waive their
`
`right to a Preliminary Response (37 C.F.R. § 42.107).
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Date: March 28, 2016
`
`
`
`/David L. Cavnauagh/
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Registration No. 36,476
`Counsel for Patent Owners
`
`
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
`1875 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
`WASHINGTON, DC 20006
`TEL: 650-600-5036
`FAX: 650-858-6100
`EMAIL: david.cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`

`
`IPR2016-00460
`Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for
`Joinder and Waiver of Preliminary Response
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that, on March 28, 2016, I caused a true and correct copy of the
`foregoing materials:
`
`
` Patent Owners’ Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for Joinder and Waiver
`of Preliminary Response
`
`to be served via electronic mail on the following attorneys of record:
`
`Richard McCormick
`Lisa M. Ferri
`Brian W. Nolan
`Mayer Brown LLP
`1221 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10020-1001
`Rmccormick@mayerbrown.com
`LFerri@mayerbrown.com
`BNolan@mayerbrown.com
`MB-Genzyme-Cabilly-IPR-2@mayerbrown.com
`
`
`
`_/Rebecca A. Whitfield/_
`Rebecca A. Whitfield
`Reg. No. 73,756
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`60 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109
`
`- 1 -

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