`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper: 17
`
`Entered: May 17, 2019
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ALPHATEC HOLDINGS, INC. and ALPHATEC SPINE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NUVASIVE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases1
`IPR2019-00361 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`IPR2019-00362 (Patent 8,361,156 B2)
`IPR2019-00546 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`Before DENISE M. POTHIER, HYUN J. JUNG, and
`SHEILA F. McSHANE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`JUNG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`1 We exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be entered in each
`proceeding. The parties are not authorized to use a multiple-case caption.
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00361 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`IPR2019-00362 (Patent 8,361,156 B2)
`IPR2019-00546 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`
`
`A conference call was held on May 16, 2019, between counsel for
`Alphatec Holdings, Inc. and Alphatec Spine, Inc. (collectively “Petitioner”),
`counsel for NuVasive, Inc. (“Patent Owner”), and Judges Pothier, Jung, and
`McShane to discuss Petitioner’s request for authorization to file a limited
`reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response in each of the above-
`captioned proceedings.
`In particular, Petitioner sought authorization to file a reply limited to
`Patent Owner’s arguments that the Petition: (1) fails to meet the
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 312; (2) contradicts prior Board decisions
`affirmed by the Federal Circuit; and (3) fails to address objective indicia of
`nonobviousness. In responses to questions by the Board, Petitioner
`indicated that the present records of these cases include sufficient evidence
`for the Board to determine whether the Petition fails to meet the
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 312 and whether the Petition contradicts
`previous Board findings. Petitioner also agreed that any issue concerning
`objective indicia of nonobviousness would not by itself be sufficient to serve
`as a basis for denying institution and that the issue could be further
`developed during trial, if the cases are instituted. Patent Owner responded
`that Petitioner failed to show good cause for authorizing a limited reply.
`Under these circumstances, we determine that Petitioner has not
`demonstrated good cause to file a reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary
`Response.
`It is hereby:
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s request for authorization to file a reply to
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response is denied.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00361 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`IPR2019-00362 (Patent 8,361,156 B2)
`IPR2019-00546 (Patent 8,187,334 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Jovial Wong
`David Dalke
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`jwong@winston.com
`ddalke@winston.com
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Michael Rosato
`Paul Tripodi
`Sonja Gerrad
`Jad A. Mills
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`mrosato@wsgr.com
`ptripodi@wsgr.com
`sgerrard@wsgr.com
`jmills@wsgr.com
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
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
