`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 12
`
` Entered: February 15, 2019
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`NEPTUNE GENERICS, LLC.
`Petitioner,
`v.
`CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS, INC.
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, ROBERT A. POLLOCK, and
`DAVID COTTA, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`COTTA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`
`The Appendix to this Order sets due dates for the parties to take action
`after institution of these proceedings. The parties may stipulate to different
`dates for DUE DATES 1 through 5 (earlier or later, but no later than DUE
`DATE 6). A notice of the stipulation, specifically identifying the changed
`due dates, must be promptly filed. The parties may not stipulate to an
`extension of the request for pre-hearing conference set forth in DUE DATE
`6 or to any change in DUE DATE 7. In addition, even if the parties stipulate
`to an extension of DUE DATE 4, any request for oral hearing must still be
`filed on or before the date set forth in this Order, to provide sufficient time
`for the Board to accommodate the hearing.
`In stipulating to different times, the parties should consider the effect
`of the stipulation on times to object to evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)), to
`supplement evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)), to conduct cross-
`examination (37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2)), and to draft papers depending on the
`evidence and cross-examination testimony (see Section D, below).
`The parties are reminded that the Testimony Guidelines appended to
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,772 (Aug.
`14, 2012) (Appendix D), apply to this proceeding. The Board may impose
`an appropriate sanction for failure to adhere to the Testimony Guidelines.
`37 C.F.R. § 42.12. For example, reasonable expenses and attorneys’ fees
`incurred by any party may be levied on a person who impedes, delays, or
`frustrates the fair examination of a witness.
`
`A. INITIAL CONFERENCE CALL
`The parties are directed to contact the Board within a month of this
`Order if there is a need to discuss proposed changes to this Order or
`proposed motions. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`48,756, 48,765–66 (Aug. 14, 2012) (guidance in preparing for the initial
`conference call). A request for an initial conference call shall include a list
`of proposed motions, if any, to be discussed during the call.
`
`B. PROTECTIVE ORDER
`1. Confidential Information
`The parties must file confidential information using the appropriate
`availability indicator in PTAB E2E, regardless of whose confidential
`information it is. It is the responsibility of the party whose confidential
`information is at issue, not necessarily the proffering party, to file the motion
`to seal.
`A protective order does not exist in a case until one is filed in the case
`and is approved by the Board. If a motion to seal is filed by either party, the
`proposed protective order should be presented as an exhibit to the motion.
`The motion to seal must include a certification that the moving party has in
`good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an
`effort to resolve any dispute. See 37 C.F.R. 42.54(a).
`The parties are urged to operate under the Board’s default protective
`order, should that become necessary. See Default Protective Order, Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48,769–71, App. B.
`If the parties choose to propose a protective order deviating from the
`default protective order, they should submit the proposed protective order
`jointly. A marked-up comparison of the proposed and default protective
`orders should be presented as an additional exhibit to the motion to seal, so
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`that differences can be understood readily. The parties should contact the
`Board if they cannot agree on the terms of the proposed protective order.
`2. Redactions
`Redactions should be limited strictly to isolated passages consisting
`entirely of confidential information. The thrust of the underlying argument
`or evidence must be clearly discernable from the redacted version.
`3. Confidential Information in Final Written Decisions
`Information subject to a protective order will become public if
`identified in a final written decision in this proceeding. A motion to
`expunge the information will not prevail necessarily over the public interest
`in maintaining a complete and understandable file history. See Office Patent
`Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48,761.
`
`C. DUE DATES
`
`1. DUE DATE 1
`The patent owner may file—
`a.
`A response to the petition (37 C.F.R. § 42.120), and
`b.
`A motion to amend the patent (37 C.F.R. § 42.121).
`The patent owner must file any such response or motion to amend by
`DUE DATE 1. If the patent owner elects not to file anything, the patent
`owner must arrange a conference call with the parties and the Board. The
`patent owner is cautioned that any arguments for patentability not raised in
`the response will be deemed waived.
`
`2. DUE DATE 2
`The petitioner must file any reply to the patent owner’s response and
`opposition to the motion to amend by DUE DATE 2.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`
`3. DUE DATE 3
`The patent owner must file any sur-reply to the petitioner’s reply and
`any reply to the petitioner’s opposition to patent owner’s motion to amend
`by DUE DATE 3.
`
`4. DUE DATE 4
`a.
`The petitioner must file any sur-reply to the patent owner’s
`reply to the opposition to the motion to amend by DUE DATE 4.
`b.
`Each party must file any motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R
`§ 42.64(c)) by DUE DATE 4.
`c. Each party must file any request for oral argument (37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.70(a)) by DUE DATE 4.
`
`5. DUE DATE 5
`Each party must file any opposition to a motion to exclude evidence
`by DUE DATE 5.
`
`6. DUE DATE 6
`Each party must file any reply for a motion to exclude evidence by
`DUE DATE 6.
`Either party may request that the Board hold a pre-hearing conference.
`
`7. DUE DATE 7
`The oral argument (if requested by either party) is set for DUE
`DATE 7. Approximately one month prior to the argument, the Board will
`issue an order setting the start time of the hearing and the procedures that
`will govern the parties’ arguments.
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`D. CROSS-EXAMINATION
`Except as the parties might otherwise agree, for each due date—
`1.
`Cross-examination begins after any supplemental evidence is
`due. 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2).
`2.
`Cross-examination ends no later than a week before the filing
`date for any paper in which the cross-examination testimony is expected to
`be used. Id.
`
`E. MOTION TO AMEND
`
`Although the filing of a Motion to Amend is authorized under our
`Rules, the patent owner must confer with the Board before filing any Motion
`to Amend. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a). A conference call to satisfy the
`requirement of 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a) must be scheduled no less than ten
`(10) business days prior to DUE DATE 1. The parties are directed to the
`Board’s Guidance on Motions to Amend in view of Aqua Products
`(https://go.usa.gov/xU6YV), and Western Digital Corp. v. SPEX Techs.,
`Inc., Case IPR2018-00082 (PTAB April 25, 2018) (Paper 13) (providing
`information and guidance on motions to amend).
`F. COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE BOARD
`Except as otherwise provided in the Rules, Board authorization is
`required before filing a motion. 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(b). A party seeking to file
`a non-preauthorized motion should request a conference to obtain
`authorization to file the motion. Parties may request a conference with us by
`contacting the Board staff by e-mail at Trials@uspto.gov or by telephone at
`571-272-7822. Requests via email are preferred; requests via telephone
`should be reserved for time-critical circumstances. Requests by email must
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`copy opposing counsel. Requests by telephone should include opposing
`counsel as practicable.
`Regarding discovery disputes, the parties are encouraged to resolve
`such issues on their own and in accordance with the precepts set forth in 37
`C.F.R. § 42.1(b). To the extent that a dispute arises between the parties
`relating to discovery, the parties should meet and confer to resolve such a
`dispute before contacting the Board. If attempts to resolve the dispute fail, a
`party may request a conference call with the Board and the other party to
`discuss the issue and, if necessary, seek authorization to file a motion in that
`regard. An email requesting a conference call shall: (a) copy the other party,
`(b) indicate generally the subject matter of the conference call and relief
`requested, (c) state whether the opposing party opposes the request, and (d)
`include multiple times when all parties are available for a conference. The
`email shall not contain substantive argument.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`DUE DATE 1 ............................................................................. May 20, 2019
`Patent Owner’s response to the petition
`Patent Owner’s motion to amend the patent
`
`DUE DATE 2 ......................................................................... August 19, 2019
`Petitioner’s reply to Patent Owner’s response to the petition
`Petitioner’s opposition to Patent Owner’s motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 3 ................................................................... September 18, 2019
`Patent Owner’s sur-reply to Petitioner’s reply to the response to the
`petition
`Patent Owner’s reply to Petitioner’s opposition to the motion to
`amend
`
`DUE DATE 4 ....................................................................... October 18, 2019
`Petitioner’s sur-reply to Patent Owner’s reply to the opposition
`to the motion to amend
`Motion to exclude evidence
`Request for oral argument (parties may not stipulate to an
`extension for the request for oral argument)
`
`DUE DATE 5 ....................................................................... October 25, 2019
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6 ..................................................................... November 1, 2019
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`Request for pre-hearing conference
`
`DUE DATE 7 ................................................................... November 14, 2019
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`8
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01494
`Patent 8,921,348 B2
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Kenneth Goldman
`MASSEY & GAIL LLP
`Ken.Goldman98@gmail.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Bob Steinberg
`David Frazier
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`Bob.Steinberg@lw.com
`David.Frazier@lw.com
`
`
`9
`
`