`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 87
`Entered: September 5, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`COOK GROUP INCORPORATED
`and COOK MEDICAL LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BOSTON SCIENTIFIC SCIMED, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2017-00435 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`IPR2017-00440 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`_______________
`
`
`Before JAMES T. MOORE, JAMES A. TARTAL,
`and ROBERT L. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KINDER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
` ORDER
`Requests for Oral Argument
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00435 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`IPR2017-00440 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`
`
`Cook Group Incorporated and Cook Medical, LLC (“Petitioner”) and
`Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) request oral argument in
`cases IPR2017-00435 and IPR2017-00440 pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70.
`Papers 86 and 85, IPR2017-00435; and, Papers 84 and 83, IPR2017-00440.
`By way of background, oral argument was conducted for these two
`proceedings on April 19, 2018, a transcript for which was previously filed in
`each case. Paper 72, IPR2017-00435; Paper 69, IPR2017-00440.
`Subsequently, in consideration of the Supreme Court holding in SAS Inst.,
`Inc. v. Iancu, additional grounds were instituted in each case. See 138 S. Ct.
`1348, 1354 (2018); see, e.g., Papers 71 and 76, IPR2018-00435.
`Following supplemental briefing on the additional grounds, Patent
`Owner and Petitioner both propose presenting additional arguments in a
`single hearing for both cases, as well as for related cases. See, e.g., Papers
`85 and 86, IPR2017-00435. Patent Owner requests 90 minutes and
`Petitioner requests 2 hours of total argument time on all six cases for each
`side. Id.
`Although we appreciate that there may be overlap in certain issues
`across all six cases, we are not persuaded that a single hearing for all six
`cases is warranted. For the efficient administration of the cases, the parties’
`requests for oral argument in IPR2017-00435 and IPR2017-00440 are
`granted as provided below.
`Cases IPR2017-00435 and IPR2017-00440 have not been
`consolidated or joined, but entail overlapping issues such that oral argument
`will be provided in a single hearing on September 17, 2018, beginning at
`1:30 PM Eastern Time on the ninth floor of the Madison Building East,
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00435 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`IPR2017-00440 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`
`600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA. Each party will have a total of 60
`minutes of argument time. The parties may allocate their argument time at
`their discretion over each of the two cases, not to exceed 60 minutes in total
`for each party. Petitioner will first present arguments in IPR2017-00435 and
`IPR 2017-00440 concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,271,731 B2. Patent Owner
`then will have the opportunity to respond to Petitioner’s arguments. Next,
`Petitioner may use any time it has reserved for rebuttal to respond to Patent
`Owner’s arguments. Then, Patent Owner may present a brief sur-rebuttal if
`it has reserved time.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. The
`hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance that will be
`accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. If the parties have any
`concern about disclosing confidential information, they are requested to
`contact the Board at least seven days in advance of the hearing to discuss the
`matter. Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served
`at least seven business days before the hearing date and filed no later than
`the time of the oral argument. The parties also shall provide a courtesy copy
`of any demonstrative exhibits to the Board at least five business days prior to
`the hearing by emailing them to Trials@uspto.gov.
`The parties must file any objections to the demonstrative exhibits with
`the Board at least two business days before the hearing. Any objection to
`demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered
`waived. The objections should identify with particularity which
`demonstrative exhibits are subject to objection, and include a short (one
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00435 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`IPR2017-00440 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`
`sentence or less) statement of the reason for each objection. No argument or
`further explanation is permitted. The Board will consider the objections and
`schedule a conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will
`reserve ruling on the objections until after the oral argument. The parties are
`directed to St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. Board of Regents
`of the University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2015)
`(Paper 65), for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative
`exhibits. The parties are reminded that the demonstrative exhibits presented
`in this case are not evidence and are intended only to assist the parties in
`presenting their oral argument to the panel.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`at the oral hearing. However, any counsel of record may present the party’s
`argument. If either party expects that its lead counsel will not be attending
`the oral argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference
`with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to
`discuss the matter. Any special requests for audio-visual equipment should
`be directed to Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be
`honored unless presented in a separate communication not less than five
`days before the hearing directed to the above email address.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00435 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`IPR2017-00440 (Patent 9,271,731 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Dominic Zanfardino
`Jeffry Nichols
`Jason Schigelone
`James Oehler
`David Bernard
`Robert Mallin
`BRINKS GILSON & LIONE
`dpz@brinksgilson.com
`jnichols@brinksgilson.com
`jschigelone@brinksgilson.com
`joehler@brinksgilson.com
`dbernard@brinksgilson.com
`rmallin@brinksgilson.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`David Caine
`Wallace Wu
`ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
`david.caine@aporter.com
`wallace.wu@aporter.com
`
`5
`
`