throbber
From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Subject:
`Attachments:
`
`Krumplitsch, Susan
`Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:53 PM
`Mao,Philip
`FW:VimovoCaseII- Mylan's Counterclaims on the ‘698 Patent
`Stipulation to Dismiss Case II 698 patent Counterclaims_Mylan REDLINEto....docx
`
`From: Swanson,Robert D. (Perkins Coie) [mailto:RSwanson@perkinscoie.com]
`Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 8:45 AM
`To: Pfifferling, Danielle <Danielle.Pfifferling@finnegan.com>; Artiles, Guillermo <gartiles@mccarter.com>; DNJ Litigation
`- JEF <HW@McCcCarter.com>; Scordino, Ellen <escordino@cooley.com>;jeff.gritton@bakerbotts.com; Monroe, James
`<james.monroe@finnegan.com>; stephen.hash@bakerbotts.com; Krumplitsch, Susan <skrumplitsch@cooley.com>;
`Roorda, Jeanette <Jeanette.Roorda@finnegan.com>; shannon.kidd@bakerbotts.com
`Cc: Gregory.Miller@rivkin.com; Nancy.Delpizzo@rivkin.com; Gene.Kang@rivkin.com; EsoNaproxen@perkinscoie.com
`Subject: RE: Vimovo Case II- Mylan's Counterclaims on the '698 Patent
`
`Danielle,
`
`Please see the attached redline of our edits to your redline. Our understanding of the local rules and the scheduling
`orders in both casesis that we were required to serve ourinvalidity contentions on the 698 patent on April 15, 2016 in
`CaseIl and February 14, 2017 in CaseIll, which is what we have done. Please notify Mylan by COB tomorrow whether
`Plaintiffs will oppose the stipulation, and if so, on what basis.
`If Plaintiffs disagree with our understandingof the local rules
`and the scheduling orders, we intend to let the Court know thatPlaintiffs oppose dismissal of the counterclaimsat issue
`without prejudice (and thus opposelitigation of the claims in the mostefficient manner, and in the casesPlaintiffs chose to
`litigate them), on the basis that Mylan complied with the scheduling order and local patentrules in CaseIll.
`
`Best,
`Rob
`
`Robert Swanson| Perkins Coie LLP
`ASSOCIATE*
`700 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005-3960
`D. +1.202.654.1729
`F. +1.202.654.9507
`E. RSwanson@perkinscoie.com
`
`* Admitted onlyin California
`** Admission to DC pending
`
`From: Pfifferling, Danielle [mailto: Danielle. Pfifferling@finnegan.com]
`Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 5:30 PM
`To: Swanson, Robert D. (WDC); Artiles, Guillermo; DNJ Litigation - JEF; 'Scordino, Ellen’; jeff.gritton@bakerbotts.com;
`Monroe, James; stephen.hash@bakerbotts.com; Krumplitsch, Susan; Roorda, Jeanette; shannon.kidd@bakerbotts.com
`Cc: Gregory.Miller@rivkin.com; Nancy.Delpizzo@rivkin.com; Gene.Kang@rivkin.com; *Eso-Naproxen
`Subject: RE: Vimovo Case II- Mylan's Counterclaims on the '698 Patent
`
`Dear Rob,
`
`Attachedis a redlined version of the draft stipulation for Mylan’s consideration.
`
`Kind Regards,
`
`Page 1 of 3
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2010
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`Page 1 of 3
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2010
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`Danielle 
` 
`Danielle C. Pfifferling
`Attorney at Law
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001-4413
`+1 202 408 4434 | fax +1 202 408 4400 | danielle.pfifferling@finnegan.com | www.finnegan.com 
`
`
`
` 
` 
` 
`From: Swanson, Robert D. (Perkins Coie) [mailto:RSwanson@perkinscoie.com]
`Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 12:16 PM
`To: Artiles, Guillermo; DNJ Litigation - JEF; Pfifferling, Danielle; 'Scordino, Ellen'; jeff.gritton@bakerbotts.com; Monroe,
`James; stephen.hash@bakerbotts.com; Krumplitsch, Susan; Roorda, Jeanette; shannon.kidd@bakerbotts.com
`Cc: Gregory.Miller@rivkin.com; Nancy.Delpizzo@rivkin.com; Gene.Kang@rivkin.com; EsoNaproxen@perkinscoie.com
`Subject: RE: Vimovo Case II- Mylan's Counterclaims on the '698 Patent
` 
`Counsel, Mylan would also appreciate a response on the draft stipulation we circulated a week ago.
`
`Thanks,
`Rob
`
`Robert Swanson | Perkins Coie LLP
`ASSOCIATE*
`700 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005-3960
`D. +1.202.654.1729
`F. +1.202.654.9507
`E. RSwanson@perkinscoie.com
`
` *
`
` Admitted only in California 
`** Admission to DC pending 
`
`From: Swanson, Robert D. (WDC)
`Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 11:36 AM
`To: 'Artiles, Guillermo'; 'DNJ Litigation - JEF'; 'Pfifferling, Danielle'; 'Scordino, Ellen'; 'jeff.gritton@bakerbotts.com';
`'Monroe, James'; 'stephen.hash@bakerbotts.com'; 'Krumplitsch, Susan'; 'Roorda, Jeanette';
`'shannon.kidd@bakerbotts.com'
`Cc: 'Gregory.Miller@rivkin.com'; 'Nancy.Delpizzo@rivkin.com'; 'Gene.Kang@rivkin.com'; *Eso-Naproxen
`Subject: RE: Vimovo Case II- Mylan's Counterclaims on the '698 Patent
` 
`Counsel,
`
`Do Plaintiffs object to Mylan’s draft stipulation? Please let us know as soon as possible, and if so, please provide times
`Plaintiffs are available to meet and confer.
`
`Thanks,
`Rob
`
`Robert Swanson | Perkins Coie LLP
`ASSOCIATE*
`700 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005-3960
`D. +1.202.654.1729
`F. +1.202.654.9507
`E. RSwanson@perkinscoie.com
`
`2
`
` *
`
` Admitted only in California 
`** Admission to DC pending 
`
`Page 2 of 3
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2010
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`
`From: Swanson, Robert D. (WDC)
`Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 8:05 AM
`To: 'Artiles, Guillermo'; DNJ Litigation - JEF; 'Pfifferling, Danielle'; 'Scordino, Ellen'; jeff.gritton@bakerbotts.com; Monroe,
`James; stephen.hash@bakerbotts.com; Krumplitsch, Susan; Roorda, Jeanette; shannon.kidd@bakerbotts.com
`Cc: Gregory.Miller@rivkin.com; Nancy.Delpizzo@rivkin.com; Gene.Kang@rivkin.com; *Eso-Naproxen
`Subject: Vimovo Case II- Mylan's Counterclaims on the '698 Patent
` 
`Counsel,
`
`As you are aware, Mylan filed counterclaims related to the ’698 patent in Vimovo case II. However, given that Plaintiffs
`asserted the ’698 patent and the related ’208 patent against Mylan in the Vimovo III case, it would be more efficient for the
`parties and the court to litigate those patents together in the Vimovo III case. To that end, we have attached a draft
`stipulation to dismiss Mylan's counterclaim in case II. Please let us know by COB Wednesday if Plaintiffs agree.
`
`Best,
`Rob
`
`Robert Swanson | Perkins Coie LLP
`ASSOCIATE*
`700 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005-3960
`D. +1.202.654.1729
`F. +1.202.654.9507
`E. RSwanson@perkinscoie.com
`
` *
`
` Admitted only in California 
`** Admission to DC pending 
`
`
`
`NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and
`immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.
`
`
`This e-mail message is intended only for individual(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise
`exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you believe you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by return e-mail and delete it from
`your mailbox. Thank you.
`
`
`
`NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and
`immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 3
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2010
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

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