throbber
Trials@uspto.gov Paper 45
`571-272-7822
`Date: March 23, 2022
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________________________________
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., CELLTRION, INC., and
`APOTEX, INC.
`Petitioners,
`v.
`REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`________________________________________
`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B21
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B22
`________________________________________
`
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, JOHN G. NEW, and
`SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`NEW, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`REVISED JOINT SCHEDULING ORDER3
`
`
`1 IPR2022-00257 and IPR2022-00301 have been joined with this
`proceeding.
`2 IPR2022-00258 and IPR2022-00298 have been joined with this
`proceeding.
`3 This Scheduling Order sets due dates that are identical in the listed cases.
`The combined caption is for administrative convenience only and does not
`indicate that IPR2021-00880 and IPR2021-00881 have been joined. The
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B2
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`parties are not authorized to use this caption without express permission of
`the Board.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B2
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`
`
`
`A. DUE DATES
`
`This Revised Scheduling Order sets the remaining due dates for
`the parties to take action over the remaining course of this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1. DUE DATE 2
`Petitioners may file a reply to the Patent Owner’s response.
`Petitioners may file an opposition to the motion to amend.
`
`
`
`2. DUE DATE 3
`Patent Owner may file a sur-reply to Petitioners’ reply.
`Patent Owner may also file either:
`
`
`
`a.
`a reply to the opposition to the motion to amend
`and preliminary board guidance (if provided); or
`a revised motion to amend.
`b.
`NOTE: If Patent Owner files neither of the above papers (a
`reply to the opposition or a revised motion to amend), and the Board
`has issued preliminary guidance, Petitioners may file a reply to the
`preliminary guidance, no later than three (3) weeks after DUE DATE
`3. Patent Owner may file a sur-reply to Petitioners’ reply to the
`preliminary guidance no later than three (3) weeks after Petitioners’
`reply.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3. DUE DATE 4
`Either party may file a request for oral argument (may not be
`extended by stipulation).
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B2
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4. DUE DATE 5
`Either party may file a motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.64(c)).
`Petitioners may file a sur-reply to the opposition to the motion
`to amend.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5. DUE DATE 6
`Either party may file an opposition to a motion to exclude
`evidence.
`Either party may request that the Board hold a pre-hearing
`conference.
`
`
`6. DUE DATE 7
`Either party may file a reply to an opposition to a motion to
`exclude evidence.
`
`7. DUE DATE 8
`The oral argument (if requested by either party) shall be held on
`this date. 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.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B2
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`
`
`
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 2 ............................................................................. May 27, 2022
`Petitioners’ reply to Patent Owner’s response to the petition
`Petitioners’ opposition to Patent Owner’s motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 3 ................................................................................ July 6, 2022
`Patent Owner’s sur-reply to Petitioners’ reply to the response to the
`petition
`Patent Owner’s reply to Petitioners’ opposition to the motion to
`amend OR Patent Owner’s revised motion to amend4
`
`DUE DATE 4 ................................................................................ July 8, 2022
`Request for oral argument (may not be extended by stipulation)
`
`DUE DATE 5 .............................................................................. July 20, 2022
`Petitioners’ sur-reply to the opposition to the motion to amend
`Motion to exclude evidence
`
`DUE DATE 6 .............................................................................. July 27, 2022
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`Request for pre-hearing conference
`
`DUE DATE 7 ........................................................................... August 2, 2022
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 8 ......................................................................... August 10, 2022
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`4 If Patent Owner files neither a reply to Petitioners’ opposition to the MTA
`nor a revised MTA, the parties are directed to Section A(2) above.
`5
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`IPR2021-00880, Patent No. 9,669,069 B2
`IPR2021-00881, Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`
`
`
`For Petitioners:
`
`William Rakoczy
`Neil McLaughlin
`Pal Molino
`RAKOCZY MOLINO MAZZOCHI SIWIK LLP
`wrakoczy@rmmslegal.com
`nmclaughlin@rmmslegal.com
`paul@rmmslegal.com
`
`For Patent Owner:
`
`Deborah Fishman
`Alice Sin Yu Ho
`ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`Deborah.fishman@kayescholer.com
`Alice.ho@arnoldporter.com
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket