`571-272-7822
`
`IPR2018-01676, Paper No. 12
`
` IPR2018-01678, Paper No. 12
`
`
`Entered: January 23, 2019
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SANOFI-AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH,
`Patent Owner.
`_____________
`
`Cases
`IPR2018-01675 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
`IPR2018-01676 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
` IPR2018-01678 (Patent 8,992,486 B2)1
`_____________
`
`
`Before HYUN J. JUNG, BART A. GERSTENBLITH, and
`JAMES J. MAYBERRY, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GERSTENBLITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`37 C.F.R. § 42.108(c)
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order is entered in each case. The parties are not authorized to use a
`multiple-case caption.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01675 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
`IPR2018-01676 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
`IPR2018-01678 (Patent 8,992,486 B2)
`
`
`On January 10, 2019, Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. requested
`authorization to file a reply to Patent Owner Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland
`GmbH’s Preliminary Response in each of the above-captioned proceedings.
`A conference call was held on January 15, 2019, between counsel for each
`party and Judges Jung, Gerstenblith, and Mayberry. A transcript of the call
`was prepared and filed as an exhibit (Ex. 1036) in each proceeding. The
`transcript reflects the details of the call that are not repeated here. For the
`reasons explained during the call, we find good cause to authorize a limited
`reply by Petitioner in each proceeding to address Patent Owner’s arguments
`under 35 U.S.C. § 314.2
`It is hereby:
`ORDERED that Petitioner is authorized to file a limited reply to the
`35 U.S.C. § 314 arguments raised in Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`in each proceeding; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that each reply shall be limited to twelve (12)
`pages and shall be filed by January 30, 2019.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2 Patent Owner’s argument includes discussion of 35 U.S.C. § 324, which
`applies to post-grant review proceedings. To the extent Petitioner chooses to
`respond to arguments based on § 324, Petitioner may do so as well.
`
`2
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Elizabeth Stotland Weiswasser
`Anish R. Desai
`Sudip K. Kundu
`Kathryn M. Kantha
`Adrian C. Percer
`Brian C. Chang
`William S. Ansley
`Matthew D. Sieger
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
`elizabeth.weiswasser@weil.com
`
`anish.desai@weil.com
`sudip.kundu@weil.com
`kathryn.kantha@weil.com
`adrian.percer@weil.com
`brian.chang@weil.com
`sutton.ansley@weil.com
`matthew.sieger@weil.com
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01675 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
`IPR2018-01676 (Patent 8,603,044 B2)
`IPR2018-01678 (Patent 8,992,486 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Richard Torczon
`Douglas Carsten
`Wesley Derryberry
`Tasha Thomas
`Jeffrey W. Guise
`Arthur Dykhuis
`Lorelei Westin
`Franklin Chu
`Nicole W. Stafford
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH &
`ROSATI
`rtorczon@wsgr.com
`dcarsten@wsgr.com
`wderryberry@wsgr.com
`tthomas@wsgr.com
`jguise@wsgr.com
`adykhuis@wsgr.com
`lwestin@wsgr.com
`ychu@wsgr.com
`nstafford@wsgr.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`