`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper: 20
`
`
`Date: October 1, 2021
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`TENNANT COMPANY,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`OXYGENATOR WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2021-00625
`Patent RE 45,415 E
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KRISTINA M. KALAN, CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER, and
`WESLEY B. DERRICK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KALAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of a Protective Order
`37 C.F.R § 42.54
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00625
`Patent RE 45,415 E
`On September 22, 2021, Patent Owner filed an unopposed motion for
`a protective order in the above-captioned case. Paper 16 (“PO Mot.”). In its
`motion, Patent Owner requests that we enter a protective order that differs
`from the Board’s default protective order, which is set forth in the
`Consolidated Trial Practice Guide, Appendix B (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280
`(Nov. 21, 2019)), available at https://www.uspto.gov/
`TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated (“CTPG”). PO Mot. 1. Patent Owner
`represents that the parties agree to entry of this modified protective order.
`Id.
`
`Patent Owner requests that we modify the Board’s default protective
`order so that Section 2(B) clarifies “that employees of the law firms of
`attorneys of record are allowed access to confidential information.” Id.
`Patent Owner represents that Patent Owner submitted a clean version of the
`proposed protective order, as well as a version indicating the differences
`between the proposed protective order and the Board’s default protective
`order. Exs. 2113, 2114. Patent Owner avers: “Good cause exists for the
`Board to enter the Proposed Protective Order to protect the parties’
`confidential information and promote efficiency in resolution of the
`dispute.” PO Mot. 1.
`Our rules concerning protective orders state: “A party may file a
`motion to seal where the motion to seal contains a proposed protective
`order . . . .” 37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a). Our rules require a motion to seal be
`accompanied by the document(s) or thing(s) proposed to be sealed. See
`37 C.F.R. § 42.14 (“A party intending a document or thing to be sealed shall
`file a motion to seal concurrent with the filing of the document or thing to be
`sealed.”).
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00625
`Patent RE 45,415 E
`We note that no motions to seal or confidential documents have been
`filed in these proceedings to date. We typically defer consideration and
`entry of a protective order until the filing of a motion to seal. Our rules,
`however, also allow for the Board, for good cause, to “issue an order to
`protect a party or person from disclosing confidential information.”
`37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a). Because the parties have agreed on the terms of the
`modified protective order, and because the parties intend to protect
`“confidential information contained in documents, discovery or testimony
`adduced, exchanged, or filed with the Board” (CTPG 107), we determine
`that good cause exists to grant Patent Owner’s unopposed Motion for Entry
`of a Protective Order.
`The parties may, in the future, file a motion to seal concurrent with
`any documents or things proposed to be sealed, to which the protective order
`entered by this Order shall apply.
`
`It is:
`
`ORDERED that the unopposed Motion for Entry of a Protective Order
`is granted, and that Patent Owner’s proposed protective order (Ex. 2113) is
`placed into effect.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00625
`Patent RE 45,415 E
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Robert Johnson
`FREDRIKSON & BYRON, P.A.
`rsjohnson@fredlaw.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Derek Vandenburgh
`Aaron Pederson
`Nathan Louwagie
`CARLSON, CASPERS, VANDENBURGH, & LINDQUIST, P.A.
`dvandenburgh@carlsoncaspers.com
`apederson@carlsoncaspers.com
`nlouwagie@carlsoncaspers.com
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`