`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`JUBILANT DRAXIMAGE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`BRACCO DIAGNOSTICS INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`______________
`
`Case IPR2018-01449
`U.S. Patent No. 9,299,467
`______________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION TO MOVE THE ORAL ARGUMENT DATE
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date
`IPR2018-01449
`U.S. Patent No. 9,299,467
`
`
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s email of September 25, 2019, Patent Owner submits
`
`this Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date.
`
`Oral argument for the above identified IPR as well as related IPRs 2018-01448
`
`and 2018-01450 (collectively “the IPRs”) is currently scheduled for November 6,
`
`2019. On this date, both lead counsel (Barry Schindler) and back-up counsel (Heath
`
`Briggs) for Patent Owner have an unavoidable conflict. Specifically, both Mr.
`
`Schindler and Mr. Briggs are required to attend an IP leadership summit for their
`
`firm (Greenberg Traurig) in Phoenix, AZ. Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs were made
`
`aware of the IP leadership summit on June 27, 2019. Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs
`
`identified the conflict shortly thereafter, and then conferred with Petitioner to obtain
`
`suitable alternative times. Patent Owner timely requested movement of the oral
`
`argument date thereafter, requesting its movement on September 3, 2019.
`
`Attendance by both Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs at the firm’s IP leadership
`
`summit is critical. Mr. Schindler is the Chair of firm’s patent prosecution group.
`
`Mr. Briggs is in a leadership position for the firm’s AIA trial practice group. The
`
`firm’s IP leadership summit is a critical meeting for the firm. Approximately thirty
`
`members of the firm’s leadership are traveling from all over the United States
`
`(including from Chicago, New York City, Morristown (NJ), Atlanta, San Francisco,
`
`Los Angeles, Denver and Washington DC) as well as from Berlin, Germany to
`
`Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date
`IPR2018-01449
`U.S. Patent No. 9,299,467
`
`attend the summit. Attendees besides Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs include three
`
`Co-Chairs of the Global IP & Technology Practice, Chair and Vice Chair of the
`
`firm’s Trademark & Brand Management Group, Vice-Chair of the Patent
`
`Prosecution Group, and two Co-Chairs of the firm’s Data and Privacy Practice. It
`
`would be severely detrimental to the firm’s summit if Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs
`
`were absent.
`
`Attendance by both Mr. Briggs and Mr. Schindler at oral argument for these
`
`IPRs is also critical. The client expects Mr. Schindler to handle oral argument for
`
`these IPRs. Further, both Mr. Schindler and Mr. Briggs have been intimately
`
`involved with all aspects of these IPRs. It would be inefficient and inappropriate for
`
`other counsel to handle oral argument for these matters.
`
`Further, there appears to be no prejudice in moving the oral argument date to
`
`another suitable day. Patent Owner has conferred with Petitioner, and both parties
`
`are available to attend oral argument any day of October 28-November 1, November
`
`13-15, and November 18-22. Although less preferred, the parties are also available
`
`to attend oral argument any day of December 2-6 and December 9-13. A final
`
`written decision in these matters is not due until February 8, 2020. Further, the
`
`disputes between the parties are narrowly tailored. Thus, having the hearing as late
`
`as December 13 would still provide nearly two-months for the Board to issue final
`
`written decisions in these matters.
`
`Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date
`IPR2018-01449
`U.S. Patent No. 9,299,467
`
`
`
`For the above reasons, Patent Owner respectfully moves the Board to provide
`
`for an alternative oral argument date for the above-identified IPRs, which alternative
`
`date may be any of the above-identified dates.
`
`Dated: September 30, 2019
`
`
`
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Heath J. Briggs
`Heath J. Briggs (Reg. No. 54,919)
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`1144 15th Street, Suite 3300
`Denver, CO 80202
`briggsh@gtlaw.com
`Phone: (303) 572-6500
`Facsimile: (303) 572-6540
`
`Barry J. Schindler (Reg. No. 32,938)
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`500 Campus Drive, Suite 400
`Florham Park, NJ 07932
`Telephone: (973) 360-7900
`Facsimile: (973) 301-8410
`SchindlerB@gtlaw.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner Bracco
`Diagnostics Inc.
`
`Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date
`IPR2018-01449
`U.S. Patent No. 9,299,467
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on this 30th day of September, 2019, a copy of this
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion to Move the Oral Argument Date has been served in its
`
`entirety via electronic mail by emailing Petitioner’s lead and backup counsel at:
`
`Robert L. Hails
`rhails@bakerlaw.com
`T. Cy Walker
`cwalker@bakerlaw.com
`Theresa M. Weisenberger
`tweisenberger@bakerlaw.com
`Jubilant-Baker@bakerlaw.com
`
`as provided for by Petitioner’s listed Service Information in its Petition.
`
`
`
` Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`Date: September 30, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`
`
`
`/s/ Heath J. Briggs
`Heath J. Briggs
`Registration No. 54,919
`1144 15th Street, Suite 3300
`Denver, CO 80202
`BriggsH@gtlaw.com
`Phone: (303) 572-6500
`Fax: (303) 572-6540
`
`
`
`
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
