`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: August 31, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`POZEN INC. and HORIZON PHARMA USA, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases1
`IPR2017-019952 (Patent 9,220,698 B2)
`IPR2018-00272 (Patent 9,393,208 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`
`1 This order applies to both cases. The parties are not authorized to use this
`style heading in subsequent papers without prior Board authorization.
`2 Petitioner Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc., from IPR2018-000894, has been
`joined as a Petitioner to this proceeding.
`
`
`Before TONI R. SCHEINER and MICHELLE N. ANKENBRAND,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANKENBRAND, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`Suspending Deadlines Due to Suggestion of Bankruptcy
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01995 (Patent 9,220,698 B2)
`IPR2018-00272 (Patent 9,393,208 B2)
`
`
`On August 28, 2018, Patent Owner Pozen Inc. (“Pozen”) filed a
`Suggestion of Bankruptcy (the “Suggestion”) in each of the above-
`referenced proceedings. Paper 50.3,4 According to the Suggestion, Pozen
`filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 on August 10, 2018. Id. at 2. On
`August 29, 2018, counsel for Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`(“Mylan”) requested a conference call to address the impact of the
`Suggestion on the schedule in these proceedings. Ex. 3002. In particular,
`Mylan noted that a deposition was scheduled to proceed on August 31, 2018,
`and that the deadline for the Petitioners’ Reply is September 7, 2018. Id.
`On August 30, 2018, Judges Ankenbrand and Scheiner held a
`conference call with counsel for the parties and bankruptcy counsel for
`Pozen to discuss the Suggestion and its impact on these proceedings.5
`During the conference call, Pozen’s bankruptcy counsel contended that the
`automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362 applies to these proceedings. See also
`Paper 50, 2 (asserting that the proceeding is stayed as of the date of Pozen’s
`bankruptcy petition). Counsel for Mylan and counsel for Dr. Reddy’s
`Laboratories, Inc. did not agree that the automatic stay applies to these
`proceedings, but were amenable to a two-week stay of the proceedings to
`determine how to address Pozen’s contentions regarding the automatic stay.
`
`3 Pozen’s Suggestion is substantively the same in each proceeding. We cite
`to the Suggestion filed in IPR2017-01995.
`4 The challenged patents also are assigned to Horizon Inc. (“Horizon”). The
`Suggestion applies only to Pozen.
`5 Although the Suggestion references a voluntary petition for relief under
`Chapter 11, see, e.g., Paper 50, 2, Pozen did not file the petition in the
`docket of these proceedings. During the course of the conference call, we
`directed Pozen to file a copy of the bankruptcy petition as an exhibit in each
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01995 (Patent 9,220,698 B2)
`IPR2018-00272 (Patent 9,393,208 B2)
`
`
`Given the parties’ disagreement regarding whether the automatic stay
`applies to these proceedings—a disagreement that, in our view, is best
`addressed in the bankruptcy court—we determined that the appropriate
`course of action was to suspend all deadlines in these proceedings until
`further notice.
`
`In view of the foregoing, it is
`ORDERED that all deadlines in these proceedings are suspended until
`further notice;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Pozen shall file a copy of the bankruptcy
`petition as an exhibit in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Pozen shall provide the Board with a
`status report on the bankruptcy proceedings by email on or before September
`28, 2018, and every thirty (30) days thereafter until ordered otherwise in
`these proceedings; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mylan (on behalf of Petitioners) shall file
`as exhibits in these proceedings any filings in the bankruptcy court that any
`of the parties to these proceedings, any party to the bankruptcy proceeding,
`or any third party makes, as well as any opinions or orders of the bankruptcy
`court related to whether the automatic stay applies to these proceedings or
`whether relief is granted from such a stay. Mylan shall make such filings in
`these proceedings no more than five (5) business days after the filings are
`made, or the opinions or orders are entered, in the bankruptcy court.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01995 (Patent 9,220,698 B2)
`IPR2018-00272 (Patent 9,393,208 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`Brandon M. White
`Emily Greb
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`bmwhite@perkinscoie.com
`egreb@perkinscoie.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Thomas A. Blinka, Ph.D.
`COOLEY LLP
`TBlinka@cooley.com
`
`Margaret J. Sampson, Ph.D
`BAKER BOTTS LLP
`Margaret.Sampson@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`