`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Celltrion, Inc.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Genentech, Inc.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 6,407,213
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2017-01374
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER CELLTRION’S OPPOSITION TO PATENT OWNER’S
`MOTION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner has sought to keep the Board from considering Exhibit 1193
`
`in two separate motions. The present one, a motion to exclude, is improper, since
`
`it challenges Exhibit 1193 as untimely and outside the scope of a reply brief, and
`
`not on any evidentiary ground. Motions to exclude are reserved for challenging
`
`the admissibility of evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence, not for arguing
`
`untimeliness and improper scope. See, e.g., Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Progressive
`
`Casualty Ins. Co., CBM2012-00002, Paper 66, at 62 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 23, 2014)
`
`(“[W]hile a motion to exclude may raise issues related to admissibility of evidence,
`
`it is not . . . a mechanism to argue that a reply contains new arguments or relies on
`
`evidence necessary to make out a prima facie case.”); Altaire Pharms. Inc. v.
`
`Paragon Bioteck, Inc., PGR2015-00011, Paper 38, at 2 (P.T.A.B. May 18, 2016).
`
`While Patent Owner purports to found its motion on Federal Rules of Evidence
`
`401 and 402, the substance of Patent Owner’s argument is that Petitioner’s citation
`
`of Exhibit 1193 did not comply with 35 U.S.C. § 312(a), which relates to the
`
`requirements for a petition, or 7 C.F.R. § 42.23(b), which relates to the permissible
`
`scope of reply papers. Similarly, Patent Owner’s argument regarding Federal Rule
`
`of Evidence 403 asserts only that Exhibit 1193 was untimely, not any evidentiary
`
`defect. These arguments are not properly raised in a motion to exclude.
`
`Patent Owner has separately filed a motion to strike Exhibit 1193 on the
`
`ground of timeliness, and Petitioner will address Patent Owner’s arguments in an
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`opposition to that motion. Since that is the appropriate procedural mechanism for
`
`challenging timeliness, the present motion to exclude should be denied and the
`
`issue decided in Patent Owner’s motion to strike.
`
`On the merits, to the extent the Board considers Patent Owner’s objections
`
`under Rules 401, 402, and 403, Exhibit 1193 is highly relevant to the knowledge of
`
`a POSA regarding the use of human consensus sequences in humanized antibodies
`
`at the time the claimed subject matter was allegedly invented. As will be
`
`addressed in Petitioner’s Opposition to Patent Owner’s Motion to Strike, Petitioner
`
`properly raised Exhibit 1193 in its Reply. Therefore, the relevance of this exhibit
`
`is not outweighed by unfair prejudice. For these additional reasons, Exhibit 1193
`
`should not be excluded from this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Dated: July 3, 2018
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Cynthia Lambert Hardman/
`Cynthia Lambert Hardman (Reg. No. 53,179)
`Elizabeth J. Holland (Reg. No. 47,657)
`Robert V. Cerwinski (admitted pro hac vice)
`Linnea P. Cipriano (Reg. No. 67,729)
`GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
`The New York Times Building
`620 Eighth Avenue
`New York, NY 10018
`(212) 813-8800 (telephone)
`(212) 355-3333 (facsimile)
`
`Sarah J. Fischer (Reg. No. 74,104)
`GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`100 Northern Avenue
`Boston, MA, 02210
`(617) 570-3908 (telephone)
`(617) 801-8991 (facsimile)
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), I certify that on this 3rd day of July, 2018, I
`
`caused a copy of this PETITIONER CELLTRION’S OPPOSITION TO PATENT
`
`OWNER’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE by email on the lead and back
`
`up counsel for Patent Owners at:
`
`David Cavanaugh (David.Cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com)
`
`Lauren V. Blakely (lauren.blakely@wilmerhale.com)
`
`Robert Gunther (Robert.Gunther@wilmerhale.com)
`
`Adam Brausa (abrausa@durietangri.com)
`
`Daralyn Durie (ddurie@durietangri.com)
`
`Andrew Danford (Andrew.Danford@wilmerhale.com)
`
`Lisa Pirozzolo (Lisa.Pirozzolo@wilmerhale.com)
`
`Kevin Prussia (Kevin.Prussia@wilmerhale.com)
`
`By: /Cynthia Lambert Hardman/
`Cynthia Lambert Hardman (Reg. No. 53,179)
`GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
`The New York Times Building
`620 Eighth Avenue
`New York, NY 10018
`(212) 813-8800 (telephone)
`(212) 355-3333 (facsimile)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`