`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 45
`Date: October 8, 2020
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`MEDTRONIC, INC. and MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`v.
`TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.À.R.L.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`IPR2020-00126 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
`IPR2020-00128 (Patent RE45,380)
`IPR2020-00129 (Patent RE45,380)
`IPR2020-00132 (Patent RE45,760)
`IPR2020-00134 (Patent RE45,760)
`IPR2020-00135 (Patent RE45,776)
`IPR2020-00137 (Patent RE47,379)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before SHERIDAN K. SNEDDEN, JON B. TORNQUIST, and
`CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, Administrative Patent Judges.
`TORNQUIST, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Adjusting Word Counts for Briefing on Conception and
`Reduction to Practice
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00126 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
`IPR2020-00128, IPR2020-00129 (Patent RE45,380)
`IPR2020-00132, IPR2020-00134 (Patent RE45,760)
`IPR2020-00135 (Patent RE45,776)
`IPR2020-00137 (Patent RE47,379)
`
`In our Consolidated Scheduling Order, we set forth a separate briefing
`
`schedule for the issue of conception and reduction to practice in IPR2020-
`00126, -00128, -00129, -00132, -00134, -00135, and -00137. See IPR2020-
`00128, Paper 26.1 In that Order, we authorized Patent Owner to file a Patent
`Owner Response of 5000 words addressing only the issue of conception and
`reduction to practice, authorized Petitioner to file a 2800 word Reply, and
`authorized Patent Owner to file a 2800 word Sur-reply. Id. at 3.
`
`On October 7, 2020, we conducted a conference call with the parties
`to discuss (1) Petitioner’s request to expand the word limits for Petitioner’s
`Reply and (2) Petitioner’s requst to file a Sur-sur-reply. We orally granted
`both requests on the call. Accordingly, Petitioner may file a Reply of 5,000
`words, Patent Owner may file a Sur-reply of 2,800 words, and Petitioner
`may file a Sur-sur-reply of 2,800 words. Petitioner’s Sur-sur-reply is to be
`filed on or before Due Date 5. Paper 26, 15.
`
`As explained during the call, no additional documentary or testimonial
`evidence is to be filed with Patent Owner’s Sur-reply or Petitioner Sur-sur-
`reply, absent express authorization from the Board.
`ORDER
`
`It is:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner may file a 5,000 word Reply addressing
`
`Patent Owner’s evidence of conception and reduction to practice, Patent
`
`
`1 We cite to the Paper numbers in IPR2020-00128. Similar Papers were filed
`in each of the above-captioned proceedings.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00126 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
`IPR2020-00128, IPR2020-00129 (Patent RE45,380)
`IPR2020-00132, IPR2020-00134 (Patent RE45,760)
`IPR2020-00135 (Patent RE45,776)
`IPR2020-00137 (Patent RE47,379)
`
`Owner may file a 2,800 word Sur-reply, and Petitioner may file a 2,800
`word Sur-sur-reply;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Due Dates set forth in the
`Consolidated Scheduling Order, as modified by the parties in Paper 32,
`remain unchanged and Petitioner’s Sur-sur-reply is due on or before Due
`Date 5; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that no documentary or testimonial evidence
`shall be filed with the Sur-reply or Sur-sur-reply, absent express
`authorization from the Board.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00126 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
`IPR2020-00128, IPR2020-00129 (Patent RE45,380)
`IPR2020-00132, IPR2020-00134 (Patent RE45,760)
`IPR2020-00135 (Patent RE45,776)
`IPR2020-00137 (Patent RE47,379)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Cyrus Morton
`cmorton@robinskaplan.com
`
`Sharon Roberg-Perez
`sroberg-perez@robinskaplan.com
`
`Christopher Pinahs
`cpinahs@robinskaplan.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Derek Vandenburgh
`dvandenburgh@carlsoncaspers.com
`
`Dennis Bremer
`dbremer@carlsoncaspers.com
`
`
`4
`
`
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
