throbber
Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 359 Filed 03/29/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 32571
`
`WILMINGTON
`RODNEY SQUARE
`
`NEW YORK
`ROCKEFELLER CENTER
`
`CHARLOTTE
`CARILLON TOWER
`
`Adam W. Poff
`P 302.571.6642
`apoff@ycst.com
`
`
`
`March 29, 2024
`
`
`VIA CM/ECF
`
`The Honorable Joshua D. Wolson
`United States District Court
`for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
`James A. Byrne United States Courthouse
`601 Market Street, Room 3809
`Philadelphia, PA 19106
`
`
`
`Dear Judge Wolson,
`
`
`
`
`
`Re: Wirtgen America, Inc. v. Caterpillar, Inc. C.A. No. 17-770-JDW
`
`We write in advance of the scheduling conference to advise the Court of two pending
`developments relating to Caterpillar’s request to lift the stay with respect to the ’995 and ’538
`patents.
`
`First, Wirtgen anticipates filing on Monday, April 1, its requests for the USPTO Director
`Review to review the final written decisions of the PTAB. Those requests will raise significant
`errors of law, including patentability arguments that the PTAB failed to address.
`
`Second, Wirtgen also anticipates filing next week a request for ex parte reexamination of
`the ’995 patent. Wirtgen’s reexamination request will raise substantial new questions of
`patentability, including an issue of obviousness-type double patenting that could not be raised in
`the inter partes review. Importantly, 92% of ex parte reexamination requests are granted by the
`USPTO leading to 78% of challenged claims being canceled or amended if the reexam is
`requested by a third party.1 Accordingly, Wirtgen’s ex parte reexamination request is likely to
`have a significant impact on the scope of any future discovery or trial concerning the ’995 patent.
`
`Lastly, Caterpillar submitted a proposed schedule to the Court that it previously did not
`share with Wirtgen America. Nor did Caterpillar attempt to meet-and-confer with Wirtgen over
`any of its proposals regarding discovery. Should the Court lift the stay, Wirtgen respectfully
`
`
`1 https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ex_parte_historical_stats_.pdf
`
`Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP
`Rodney Square | 1000 North King Street | Wilmington, DE 19801
`P 302.571.6600 F 302.571.1253 YoungConaway.com
`
`

`

`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 359 Filed 03/29/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 32572
`
`Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP
`Judge Wolson
`March 29, 2024
`Page 2
`
`requests that the parties have an opportunity to meet-and-confer over the scope and timing of
`discovery that remains to be completed and associated deadlines.
`
`
`
`Respectfully,
`
`/s/ Adam W. Poff
`
`Adam W. Poff (No. 3990)
`
`AWP:hs
`cc: All Counsel of Record (via email)
`
`
`
`

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