`Lu, John; Trials
`Jeffries, Andrea W.; Geers, Sarah A.; IPR2023-00760; Hughes, Diane L.; PTABDocketL2Y7; PTABDocketG2F1;
`PTABDocketC3L8; PTABDocketG3S7; PTABDocketG3D7
`RE: IPR2023-00760: Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
`Thursday, July 6, 2023 10:59:47 AM
`image003.png
`
`From:
`To:
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`Date:
`Attachments:
`
`Counsel,
`
`From the Board –
`
`Petitioner is authorized to file a ten-page reply to the POPR to address the topics identified in the
`email below. The reply must be filed by July 17, 2023.
`
`Patent Owner is authorized to file a ten-page sur-reply to Petitioner’s reply to address the
`arguments raised in the reply. The reply must be filed by July 31, 2023.
`
`No new evidence is allowed with the briefing.
`
`No conference is necessary at this time.
`
`Regards,
`
`Esther Goldschlager
`Supervisory Paralegal Specialist
`Patent Trial & Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`
`From: Lu, John <jlu@orrick.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2023 2:38 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: Jeffries, Andrea W. <ajeffries@jonesday.com>; Geers, Sarah A. <sgeers@jonesday.com>;
`IPR2023-00760 <IPR2023-00760@jonesday.com>; Hughes, Diane L. <dlhughes@JonesDay.com>;
`PTABDocketL2Y7 <PTABDocketL2Y7@orrick.com>; PTABDocketG2F1
`<PTABDocketG2F1@orrick.com>; PTABDocketC3L8 <PTABDocketC3L8@orrick.com>;
`PTABDocketG3S7 <PTABDocketG3S7@orrick.com>; PTABDocketG3D7
`<PTABDocketG3D7@orrick.com>
`Subject: IPR2023-00760: Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
`
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE SOURCE before
`responding, clicking on links, or opening attachments.
`
`Dear Board,
`
`I am lead counsel for Petitioner in Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer
`Center, IPR2023-00760. Last week, Patent Owner submitted a Preliminary Response.
`Petitioner requests a ten-page reply brief to address three issues raised by the POPR,
`identified below, and would agree to an equal-length sur-reply from Patent Owner in
`
`Exhibit 3001
`
`
`
`response. Petitioner has conferred with Patent Owner (copied on this email), who believes
`additional briefing to be unnecessary. The parties disagree about whether these proposed
`topics for reply briefing were reasonably foreseeable.
`
`Petitioner’s three proposed topics for reply briefing are:
`
`1. Whether “Singh-3” (Ex. 2001), a post-priority date publication, and “Singh-2” (Ex.
`2003) discuss the same composition as Singh 2008 (Ex. 1003)
`2. The law of anticipation as it applies to whether in-vivo data is required for Singh 2008
`3. How, if at all, Ex. 2014, should be evaluated by the Board for transduction efficacy
`
`The parties are available for a conference call on Thursday between 11am – 1pm ET and
`Friday between 11am – 3pm ET, should the Board wish to further discuss these matters.
`
`Sincerely,
`Yite John Lu
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner Miltenyi
`Reg. No. 63,158
`
`John Lu
`Partner
`
`Orrick
`Los Angeles
`T (213) 612-2374
`M (510) 325-4415
`jlu@orrick.com
`
`NOTICE TO RECIPIENT | This e-mail is meant for only the intended recipient of the transmission, and may be a
`communication privileged by law. If you received this e-mail in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying
`of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately of the error by return e-mail and please delete this message
`from your system. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
`
`For more information about Orrick, please visit http://www.orrick.com.
`
`In the course of our business relationship, we may collect, store and transfer information about you. Please see our privacy
`policy at https://www.orrick.com/Privacy-Policy to learn about how we use this information.
`
`
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
