throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper No. 10
`
`Entered: October 17, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`MAHLE FILTER SYSTEMS NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INGEVITY SOUTH CAROLINA, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019-00960
`Patent RE38,844 E
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before DONNA M. PRAISS, CHRISTOPHER L. CRUMBLEY, and
`JON B. TORNQUIST, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CRUMBLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review
`and Denying Motion for Joinder
`35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a), 315(c)
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00960
`Patent RE38,844 E
`
`
`Mahle Filter Systems North America, Inc. filed a Petition requesting
`an inter partes review of claims 1–8, 11, 12, 14–16, 18–21, 24, 25, 27–29,
`31–33, 36, 37, 39–41, 43–45, 48, 49, and 51–53 of U.S. Patent No.
`RE38,844 E (Ex. 1001, “the ’844 patent”). Paper 1. Mahle also filed a
`Motion for Joinder seeking to join this proceeding with an inter partes
`review filed by BASF Corporation challenging the ’844 patent, case number
`IPR2019-00202 (“the 202 IPR”). Paper 3. Ingevity South Carolina, LLC,
`identified as a real party in interest to the ’844 patent (Paper 5, 1)1, filed a
`Preliminary Response to the Petition. Paper 8. Ingevity also filed an
`Opposition to the Motion for Joinder. Paper 7.
`According to Mahle, the Petition in this case is “intentionally
`identical” to the Petition filed by BASF in the 202 IPR, and both seek to
`challenge the same claims of the ’844 patent on the same grounds. Paper 3,
`1. Both Petitions are supported by the same evidence, including the
`testimony of the same expert. Id. Mahle presents no reason why our
`decision whether to institute trial in the 202 IPR should not be controlling in
`this proceeding.
`On May 13, 2019, we determined that the Petition in the 202 IPR had
`not demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that at least 1 claim of the ’844
`patent is unpatentable, and thus denied institution of an inter partes review
`trial. See IPR2019-00202, Paper 10. BASF requested rehearing of that
`Decision (IPR 2019-00202, Paper 11), and in a Decision entered today we
`deny rehearing. IPR2019-00202, Paper 13. For the same reasons stated in
`
`
`1 Ingevity’s Mandatory Notices also list Ingevity Corporation as a real party
`in interest, but only Ingevity South Carolina, LLC is named as a party in this
`proceeding. Paper 5, 1.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00960
`Patent RE38,844 E
`
`our Decision Denying Institution and Decision Denying Rehearing, we
`conclude that the record in this proceeding, which is identical to that found
`in the 202 IPR, is insufficient to establish a reasonable likelihood that at
`least 1 claim of the ’844 patent is unpatentable. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`§ 314(a), an inter partes review may not be instituted unless the information
`presented in the Petition and Preliminary Response shows “there is a
`reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least
`1 of the claims challenged in the petition.” Thus, we decline to institute an
`inter partes review.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(c), if an inter partes review has been
`instituted, the Director may join as a party to that inter partes review any
`person who files a petition that the Director2 “determines warrants the
`institution of an inter partes review.” At least two preconditions of this
`provision have not been met: first, we did not institute an inter partes
`review in the 202 IPR, and second, we do not determine that the Petition in
`this proceeding warrants institution. The Motion for Joinder is, therefore,
`denied.
`
`ORDER
`
`For the reasons given, it is:
`ORDERED that the Petition is denied as to all challenged claims, and
`no trial is instituted; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Joinder is denied.
`
`
`
`2 The responsibility for determining whether to institute an inter partes
`review has been delegated to the Board. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.4(a) (“The
`Board institutes the trial on behalf of the Director.”).
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2019-00960
`Patent RE38,844 E
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Randall Peck
`WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD LLP
`rpeck@wnj.com
`
`Jeanne Gills
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`jmgills@foley.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brian Buroker
`Spencer Ririe
`GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`bburoker@gibsondunn.com
`sririe@gibsondunn.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`

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