`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 78
` Entered: June 21, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INNOPHARMA LICENSING, INC., INNOPHARMA LICENSING LLC,
`INNOPHARMA INC., INNOPHARMA LLC,
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., MYLAN INC., LUPIN LTD. and
`LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`v.
`SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD., BAUSCH & LOMB, INC., and
`BAUSCH & LOMB PHARMA HOLDINGS CORP.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00903
`Patent 8,129,431 B2
`
`____________
`Before FRANCISCO C. PRATS, ERICA A. FRANKLIN, and
`GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Denying Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Petitioners’ Response to Patent
`Owner’s Observation Regarding Cross-Examination of Reply Witnesses
`Dr. Laskar and Mr. Hofmann
`37 C.F.R. § 42.14
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00903
`Patent 8,129,431 B2
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`Petitioners filed a Motion to Seal Petitioners’ Response to Patent
`Owner’s Motion for Observation Regarding Cross-Examination of Reply
`Witnesses Dr. Laskar and Mr. Hofmann (“Petitioners’ Response to
`Observations”) (Paper 68). Paper 65 (“Mot.”).
`For the reasons described in the following discussion, we deny
`without prejudice Petitioners’ Motion to Seal.
`II. DISCUSSION
`“There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in a
`quasi-judicial administrative proceeding open to the public, especially in an
`inter partes review which determines the patentability of claims in an issued
`patent and therefore affects the rights of the public.” Garmin Int’l v. Cuozzo
`Speed Techs., LLC, IPR2012-00001, slip op. at 1–2 (PTAB Mar. 14, 2013)
`(Paper 34). A motion to seal may be granted for good cause. 37 C.F.R. §
`42.54. The moving party bears the burden of showing that there is good
`cause for the relief requested, including why the information is appropriate
`to be filed under seal. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20, 42.54. The Office Patent Trial
`Practice Guide notes that 37 C.F.R. § 42.54 identifies confidential
`information in a manner consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
`26(c)(1)(G), which provides for protective orders for trade secret or other
`confidential research, development, or commercial information. 77 Fed.
`Reg. at 48,760. Until a motion to seal is decided, documents filed with the
`motion shall be sealed provisionally. 37 C.F.R. § 42.14.
`Petitioners assert that the Petitioners’ Response to Observations
`contains or refers to information contained in the cross-examination
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00903
`Patent 8,129,431 B2
`
`transcripts of Dr. Paul Laskar (Ex. 2272) and Mr. Ivan Hofmann (Ex. 2273),
`that Patent Owner seeks to seal by another motion (see Paper 61). Mot. 1.
`Petitioners do not indicate whether it seeks to seal portions or the
`entirety of Petitioners’ Response to Observations. Further, Petitioners
`“make[] no assertion whether or not [Exhibits 2272, 2273, and Paper 68]
`contain confidential information.” Id. at 2. As the moving party, Petitioners
`have failed their burden of showing that there is good cause for the relief
`requested. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20, 42.54.
`Moreover, a protective order has not been entered in the captioned
`proceedings and an acceptable proposed protective order has not been filed.
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioners’ Motion to Seal Petitioners’
`Response to Observations is denied without prejudice. We exercise our
`discretion to maintain that filing under a provisional seal, in the manner
`filed, through July 31, 2016, to allow time for a party to file a motion to seal
`that shows good cause for the relief requested, after a protective order has
`been entered in this proceeding, and/or to withdraw the provisionally sealed
`material.
`
`
`ORDER
`In accordance with the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion to Seal Petitioners’ Response
`to Patent Owner’s Motion for Observation Regarding Cross-Examination of
`Reply Witnesses Dr. Laskar and Mr. Hofmann (Paper 68) is denied without
`prejudice;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Paper 68 shall remain provisionally
`sealed until further notice by the Board;
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00903
`Patent 8,129,431 B2
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED a party may file a revised or new motion to
`seal and/or withdraw the provisionally sealed material on or before July 31,
`2016; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that any opposition to a revised or new
`motion to seal shall be filed within 5 business days after the filing of the
`motion.
`
`PETITIONERS:
`Jitendra Malik
`jitty.malik@alston.com
`Lance Soderstrom
`lance.soderstrom@alston.com
`Joseph Janusz
`joe.janusz@alston.com
`James Abe
`james.abe@alston.com
`
`Deborah Yellin
`dyellin@crowell.com
`Jonathan Lindsay
`jLindsay@Crowell.com
`Shannon Lentz
`SLentz@Crowell.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Bryan Diner
`bryan.diner@finnegan.com
`Justin Hasford
`justin.hasford@finnegan.com
`Joshua Goldberg
`Joshua.goldberg@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
