`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., CELLTRION, INC., and
`APOTEX, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No.: IPR2021-008811
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,254,338 B2
`Filed: July 12, 2013
`Issued: February 9, 2016
`Inventor: George D. Yancopoulos
`
`Title: USE OF A VEGF ANTAGONIST TO TREAT
`ANGIOGENIC EYE DISORDERS
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2022-00258 and IPR2022-00298 have been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a) and the Board’s Revised Joint Scheduling
`
`Order, dated March 23, 2022 (Paper 48), Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
`
`(“Petitioner”) hereby submits this Request for Oral Argument on issues related to
`
`the patentability of claims 1, 3-11, 13-14, 16-24, and 26 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,254,338 B2. Petitioner intends to discuss the issues raised in the parties’ papers
`
`in this proceeding and the Board’s Institution Decision, dated November 10, 2021
`
`(Paper 21), as well as any other issues the Board deems necessary for issuing a Final
`
`Written Decision.
`
`The Board has scheduled an oral argument for August 10, 2022, for this
`
`proceeding as well as in related proceeding IPR2021-00880 (U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,669,069). See Paper 48, 1 n.3, 5. Petitioner proposes that separate oral argument
`
`is unnecessary given the significant overlap between the two proceedings.
`
`Accordingly, in an effort to maximize efficiency and preserve the Board’s
`
`resources, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board consolidate the oral argument
`
`for this proceeding (IPR2021-00881) with the oral argument for related proceeding
`
`IPR2021-00880. Petitioner further requests that the Board allot 90 minutes total for
`
`the consolidated oral argument, which would be divided equally between the parties
`
`(45 minutes per side). Petitioner and Patent Owner have met and conferred on the
`
`subject of oral argument. It is Petitioner’s understanding that Patent Owner does
`
`not agree with the above proposal.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Petitioner further requests that the consolidated oral argument take place in-
`
`person at the USPTO’s headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. Petitioner requests
`
`that in-house counsel and any other non-arguing attorneys be permitted to attend
`
`the consolidated oral argument remotely. Petitioner will advise the Board as to any
`
`audio/video request as soon as practicable.
`
`
`
`Dated: July 8, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`RAKOCZY MOLINO MAZZOCHI SIWIK LLP
`
`/Paul J. Molino/
`Paul J. Molino
`Registration No. 45,350
`6 West Hubbard Street
`Chicago, IL 60654
`Telephone:
`(312) 222-6300
`Facsimile:
`(312) 843-6260
`paul@rmmslegal.com
`
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
`
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a) was served
`
`on July 8, 2022, via electronic mail by agreement of the parties, to the following
`
`counsel of record for Patent Owners:
`
`Alice S. Ho (Lim. Rec. No. L1162)
`Victoria Reines
`Jeremy Cobb
`Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
`601 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
`Washington D.C. 20001
`Tel: 202.942.5000
`Fax: 202.942.5999
`Alice.Ho@arnoldporter.com
`Victoria.Reines@arnoldporter.com
`Jeremy.Cobb@arnoldporter.com
`
`
`
`/Paul J. Molino/
`Paul J. Molino (Reg. No. 45,350)
`
`Deborah E. Fishman (Reg. No. 48,621)
`David A. Caine (Reg. No. 52,683)
`Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
`3000 El Camino Real
`Five Palo Alto Square, Suite 500
`Palo Alto, California 94306-3807
`Telephone: 650.319.4519
`Telephone: 650.319.4710
`Facsimile: 650.319.4573
`Deborah.Fishman@arnoldporter.com
`David.Caine@arnoldporter.com
`RegeneronEyleaIPRs@arnoldporter.com
`
`Daniel Reisner
`Matthew M. Wilk
`Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
`250 West 55th Street
`New York, New York 10019-9710
`Telephone: 212.836.8000
`Fax: 212.836.8689
`Daniel.Reisner@arnoldporter.com
`Matthew.Wilk@arnoldporter.com
`
`
`
`
`
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
