`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 27
`Date: October 11, 2023
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BAUSCH HEALTH IRELAND LIMITED,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2022-01104
`Patent 9,919,024 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before SHERIDAN SNEDDEN, CYNTHIA M. HARDMAN, and
`MICHAEL A. VALEK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`SNEDDEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion to Expunge
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14, 42.56
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01104
`Patent 9,919,024 B2
`
`Patent Owner filed a motion to expunge the confidential versions of
`
`Exhibit 2013 (confidential version of Clinical Study Report) and Paper 7
`
`(confidential version of Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, which
`
`discusses the Clinical Study Report). See Paper 20 (“Motion”). Petitioner
`
`did not oppose the Motion. For the reasons stated below, we grant the
`
`Motion.
`
`The Board previously sealed Exhibit 2013 and Paper 7. See Paper 15,
`
`19–20. The record contains redacted versions of these documents. See
`
`Mot. 3. Unless the Board grants a motion to expunge, confidential exhibits
`
`will ordinarily become public 45 days after denial of a petition to institute a
`
`trial. See Patent Trial and Appeal Board Consolidated Trial Practice Guide
`
`(November 2019) (“Trial Practice Guide”)1 21–22. This is because a strong
`
`public policy exists for making public all information filed in our
`
`administrative trial proceedings. 37 C.F.R. § 42.14. Thus, we resolve the
`
`Motion by balancing the public’s interest in maintaining a complete and
`
`understandable record against a party’s demonstrated interest in protecting
`
`truly sensitive, confidential information. Trial Practice Guide 22.
`
`Patent Owner correctly avers that the Board “did not cite anything
`
`exclusively in the confidential documents in its decision denying institution
`
`of the inter partes review.” Mot. 4. Additionally, we are persuaded that the
`
`details of the sealed confidential information are not necessary to an
`
`understanding of the reasons supporting our decision to deny institution. As
`
`such, we find that the public’s interest in access to those details is minimal,
`
`and we accept Patent Owner’s unopposed argument that good cause exists to
`
`expunge the confidential versions of Exhibit 2013 and Paper 7.
`
`
`1 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01104
`Patent 9,919,024 B2
`
`Accordingly, we grant Patent Owner’s Motion to Expunge.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion to Expunge is granted; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the confidential versions of Exhibit 2013
`
`and Paper 7 are expunged.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01104
`Patent 9,919,024 B2
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Jad Mills
`Richard Torczon
`Nicole Stafford
`Dennis Gregory
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`jmills@wsgr.com
`rtorczon@wsgr.com
`nstafford@wsgr.com
`dgregory@wsgr.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Justin J. Hasford
`Bryan C. Diner
`Joshua L. Goldberg
`Caitlin E. O’Connell
`Kyu Yun Kim
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P.
`justin.hasford@finnegan.com
`bryan.diner@finnegan.com
`lauren.robinson@finnegan.com
`connell@finnegan.com
`kyuyun.kim@finnegan.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
