`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 63
`Entered: December 10, 2013
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`CORNING INCORPORATED
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DSM IP ASSETS B.V.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00043 (Patent 7,171,103)
`Case IPR2013-00044 (Patent 6,961,508)
`Case IPR2013-00045 (Patent 6,339,666)
`Case IPR2013-00046 (Patent 6,110,593)
`Case IPR2013-00047 (Patent 6,438,306)
`Case IPR2013-00048 (Patent 6,298,189)
`Case IPR2013-00049 (Patent 6,298,189)
`Case IPR2013-00050 (Patent 6,323,255)
`Case IPR2013-00052 (Patent 7,276,543)
`Case IPR2013-00053 (Patent 7,276,543)1
`
`Before GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, JENNIFER S. BISK, and
`SCOTT E. KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that arise in all ten cases. We therefore
`exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`On Request for Rehearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.71
`
`DSM requests rehearing of our Decision on Rehearing entered
`
`December 9, 2013. DSM requests that a supplemental response declaration
`
`of Professor Christopher Bowman be authorized in case IPR2013-00052 and
`
`that the deadline for filing the Supplemental Responses and supplemental
`
`response declarations be extended to December 27, 2013. The Board grants
`
`the requests to the extent explained below.
`
`1. Supplemental response declaration in IPR2013-00052
`
`A typographical error in our December 9, 2013 rehearing decision is
`
`responsible for this confusion. The discussion in the first full paragraph on
`
`page 4 should have been directed to cases IPR2013-00050 and -00053,
`
`not -00052. A supplemental response declaration should have been
`
`authorized in IPR2013-00052 instead of in IPR2013-00053.
`
`2. Extension of time to file Supplemental Responses
`
`DSM argues that we erred in refusing to grant the requested extension
`
`of time because we failed to appreciate that Due Date 4 has been extended,
`
`by stipulation, to January 21, 2014. DSM states that Professor Bowman has
`
`teaching responsibilities through Thursday, December 12, 2013 and will be
`
`unduly burdened to meet the December 13, 2013 filing deadline. DSM also
`
`states that it will conduct a cross-examination deposition of Dr. Sogah on
`
`December 13, 2013, and Professor Bowman needs time to review the
`
`transcript.
`
`We have reconsidered our decision but remain unpersuaded that DSM
`
`has shown good cause for an extension of time. DSM has been in
`
`possession of all the gel permeation chromatography information that
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Professor Bowman is authorized to testify about since November 20, 2013.
`
`DSM has not explained why a period of time in excess of three weeks is
`
`insufficient for this purpose. The timing of DSM’s cross-examination of Dr.
`
`Sogah is irrelevant; Professor Bowman’s supplemental response declaration
`
`is to be directed solely to his interpretation of the late-produced gel
`
`permeation chromatography data itself, not to his opinion of Dr. Sogah’s
`
`interpretation of it. Dr. Bowman may address Dr. Sogah’s interpretation of
`
`the data in a reply declaration.
`
`We have now twice considered the issue of extending DSM’s due date
`
`for filing its Supplemental Replies and the supplemental reply declaration of
`
`Professor Bowman. DSM has failed, both times, to show good cause for an
`
`extension beyond December 13, 2013. We exercise our discretion under
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5 to order that DSM may not seek further rehearing on this
`
`issue without our prior authorization.
`
`It is hereby
`
`ORDERED that items 1 and 3 on page 5 of the December 9, 2013
`
`Decision on the Request for Rehearing are corrected to read as follows:
`
`
`
`1. DSM is authorized to submit a supplemental response
`
`declaration of Professor Christopher Bowman with its
`
`Supplemental Response in IPR2013-00043, -00044, -00045,
`
`-00046, -00047, -00048, -00049, and -00052;
`
`
`
`3. DSM is not authorized to submit a supplemental response
`
`declaration of Professor Christopher Bowman with its
`
`Supplemental Response in IPR2013-00050 or in IPR2013-
`
`00053;
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that DSM’s request for an extension of time
`
`from December 13, 2013 to December 27, 2013 in which to submit the
`
`Supplemental Response and supplemental response declaration of Professor
`
`Bowman is denied; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that DSM may not seek rehearing on our
`
`decision on the extension of time without prior authorization of the Board.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Michael L. Goldman
`Jeffrey N. Townes
`Edwin V. Merkel
`LeClairRyan, A Professional Corporation
`Michael.Goldman@leclairryan.com
`Jeffrey.Townes@leclairryan.com
`Edwin.Merkel@leclairryan.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Sharon A. Israel
`Joseph A. Mahoney
`Mayer Brown LLP
`SIsrael@mayerbrown.com
`JMahoney@mayerbrown.com
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
