throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 80
`Entered: June 21, 2021
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`PFIZER INC.,1
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NOVO NORDISK A/S,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2020-003242
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, JOHN G. NEW, and
`SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Joint Motion to Terminate the Proceeding and Joint Request to
`Treat Settlement Documents as Business Confidential Information
`35 U.S.C § 317
`
`
`1 This proceeding has been terminated as to the original petitioner, Mylan
`Institutional LLC. Paper 67.
`2 IPR2020-01252 has been joined with this proceeding. Paper 33.
`
`

`

`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`
`With authorization of the Board, Novo Nordisk A/S (“Patent Owner”)
`and Pfizer Inc. (“Petitioner Pfizer”) filed a joint motion to terminate the
`proceeding. Paper 77. Patent Owner filed a true copy of their written
`settlement agreement under seal. Ex. 2102. Additionally, with authorization
`from the Board, the parties filed a joint request that the settlement agreement
`be treated as business confidential information and kept separate from the
`file of US Patent No. 8,114,833 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the ’833 patent”). Paper 78.
`The Decision on Institution for this proceeding was entered on June
`23, 2020. Paper 12. The Decision on Institution of IPR2020-01252 and
`Granting Petitioner Pfizer Inc.’s Motion for Joinder with this proceeding was
`entered on December 4, 2020. Paper 33. On March 26, 2021, the parties
`presented arguments at an oral hearing. Paper 51. Thereafter, with
`authorization from the Board, Patent Owner and Petitioner Mylan filed a
`joint motion to terminate the proceeding as to Petitioner Mylan because they
`reached an agreement that settled their dispute and all litigation between
`them involving the ’833 patent. Paper 66, 1–6. As noted in footnote 1,
`above, we granted the Termination as to Petitioner Mylan on April 16, 2021.
`Paper 67. On that same date, Petitioner Pfizer and Patent Owner requested
`authorization to file a motion to terminate the proceeding. We now consider
`that motion, as well as their joint request to treat their settlement agreement
`as business confidential information and to keep it separate from the file of
`the ’833 patent.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`
` The parties assert that their requested termination is appropriate
`because they have settled their dispute concerning the ’833 patent and have
`agreed to move to terminate this proceeding in full. Mot. 2 (citing
`Ex. 2102). The parties explain that there is no pending district court
`litigation between them that involves the ’833 patent. Id. at 3. Additionally,
`the parties confirm that the district court litigation between Patent Owner
`and Mylan involving the ’833 patent, i.e., Novo Nordisk Inc. et al. v. Mylan
`Institutional LLC, C.A. No. 19-cv-01551 (D. Del.), was resolved by a
`settlement between those parties and dismissed by the court on April 6,
`2021. Id. Further, the parties correctly note that the Board has not issued a
`final written decision in this proceeding. Id.
`Having considered the circumstances involved in this proceeding,
`including the foregoing assertions of the parties, we determine that a
`termination of the proceeding is appropriate.
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b),
`[a]ny agreement or understanding between the patent owner and
`a petitioner, including any collateral agreements referred to in
`such agreement or understanding, made in connection with, or in
`contemplation of, the termination of an inter partes review under
`this section shall be in writing and a true copy of such agreement
`or understanding shall be filed in the Office before the
`termination of the inter partes review as between the parties.
`
`See also 37 C.F.R. § 42.74(b) (“Any agreement or understanding between
`the parties made in connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination
`of a proceeding shall be in writing and a true copy shall be filed with the
`Board before the termination of the trial.”). As noted above, the parties filed
`a settlement agreement relating to these proceedings. In their joint motion,
`they certify that “Exhibit 2102 is a true and complete copy of the Settlement
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Agreement, and there are no other written or oral agreements or
`understandings between Pfizer and Novo Nordisk that are made in
`connection with, or in contemplation of, the termination of the instant
`proceeding.” Mot. 2. Based on that understanding, we determine that the
`parties have satisfied section 317(b).
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`In accordance with the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the joint motion to terminate the proceeding is
`granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that this inter partes review is terminated;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the joint request that the settlement
`agreement, Ex. 2102, be treated as business confidential information and
`kept separate from the file of the ’833 patent is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`For PETITIONER PFIZER INC:
`
`Thomas J. Meloro
`tmeloro@willkie.com
`
`Michael W. Johnson
`mjohnson1@willkie.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER NOVO NORDISK A/S:
`
`Jeffrey Oelke
`joelke@fenwick.com
`
`Ryan Johnson
`Ryan.johnson@fenwick.com
`
`Laura Moran
`Laura.moran@fenwick.com
`
`5
`
`

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