`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 43
`Entered: August 13, 2018
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MICRO LABS LIMITED and
`MICRO LABS USA INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SANTEN PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD. and
`ASAHI GLASS CO., LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01434
`Patent 5,886,035
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JO-ANNE M. KOKOSKI, CHRISTOPER G. PAULRAJ, and
`DEBRA L. DENNETT, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KOKOSKI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01434
`Patent 5,886,035
`
`
`On August 8, 2018, a conference call was held between counsel for
`the parties and Judges Kokoski, Paulraj, and Dennett. Petitioner requested
`the conference to discuss Patent Owner’s Motions for Observations
`Regarding Cross-Examination Testimony of Dr. Mitchell A. deLong
`(Paper 34) and Dr. Aron D. Rose (Paper 35) (collectively, “the
`Observations”). Petitioner requested that we expunge the Observations or,
`in the alternative, that we authorize Petitioner to file a motion to expunge the
`Observations, because, according to Petitioner, they do not comply with the
`Board’s rules and guidance regarding such papers.
`In particular, Petitioner contended that the Observations include
`improper arguments, are excessively long, and generally are not concise
`statements of relevance of precisely identified testimony to precisely
`identified arguments or portions of exhibits as required by the Scheduling
`Order. See Paper 12, 5. Petitioner confirmed, however, that it is able to
`respond to the Observations. Patent Owner disagreed with Petitioner’s
`contentions, and argued that the Observations are proper.
`We explained to the parties that we are capable of discerning proper
`and improper observations when considering them in rendering our final
`written decision in this proceeding. At that time, if we determine that the
`Observations (or any portion thereof) do not adhere to the Board’s rules and
`guidance, we will disregard the Observations in their entirety (or the non-
`compliant portion thereof). Accordingly, we denied Petitioner’s request to
`expunge the Observations, or, in the alternative, authorize Petitioner to file a
`motion to expunge the Observations.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01434
`Patent 5,886,035
`
`
`In consideration of the above, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s request that the Board expunge Patent
`Owner’s Observations is denied; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s alternative request for
`authorization to file a motion to expunge the Observations is denied.
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Cedric C.Y. Tan
`Sean M. Weinman
`H. Keeto Sabharwal
`Yun Wei
`Alton L. Hare
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP
`SHAW PITTMAN LLP
`cedric.tan@pillsburylaw.com
`sean.weinman@pillsburylaw.com
`keeto.sabharwal@pillsburylaw.com
`sophie.wei@pillsburylaw.com
`alton.hare@pillsburylaw.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Arlene L. Chow
`Ernest Yakob, Ph.D.
`HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
`arlene.chow@hoganlovells.com
`ernest.yakob@hoganlovells.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
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
