Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 60
`Entered: February 14, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`HENDRICKSON USA L.L.C., GREAT DANE L.L.C., and
`QUEST GLOBAL, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`v.
`TRANS TECHNOLOGIES COMPANY,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before KEN B. BARRETT, JEFFREY A. STEPHENS, and
`GARTH D. BAER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`STEPHENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Joint Motion to Expunge
`Conduct of the Proceeding Regarding Final Written Decision
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 60
`Entered: February 14, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`HENDRICKSON USA L.L.C., GREAT DANE L.L.C., and
`QUEST GLOBAL, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`v.
`TRANS TECHNOLOGIES COMPANY,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before KEN B. BARRETT, JEFFREY A. STEPHENS, and
`GARTH D. BAER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`STEPHENS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Joint Motion to Expunge
`Conduct of the Proceeding Regarding Final Written Decision
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`I.
`On December 3, 2018, we issued a Final Written Decision under seal
`in the above-referenced inter partes review to afford the parties an
`opportunity to identify any confidential information to which we may have
`referred in the Final Written Decision. Paper 58 (also referred to as the
`“Final Decision”). In the Final Decision, we granted the parties’ joint
`motions to seal, determining that good cause existed for portions of certain
`papers and exhibits to remain under seal until 45 days after resolution of
`appellate proceedings, or, if no appeal is taken, after the time for filing a
`notice of appeal has expired. Paper 58, 66. The time for appealing the Final
`Decision has expired, and neither party has appealed. The Final Decision
`notes that a motion to expunge the sealed version of documents may be
`filed, but the motion “must state whether the document sought to be
`expunged was referred to in the Final Written Decision and identify any
`specific portions of the document referred to in the Final Written Decision.”
`Id. at 66–67. Additional instructions were provided. Id. at 67.
`On December 21, 2018, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Expunge,
`which seeks to expunge from the record Papers 42 and 51, and Exhibits
`2011–2013, 2016–2019, and 2034. Paper 59 (“Motion”). We understand
`the Motion to seek to expunge only the sealed versions of the listed exhibits,
`as the Motion states that “each of the papers and exhibits sought to be
`expunged has a corresponding redacted version publicly available on
`PTAB’s e2e filing system.” Id. at 3. The Motion also states that the parties
`agree the Final Decision may be made publicly available without any
`redactions. Id. at 2.
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`
`We determine that it is appropriate to expunge the sealed versions of
`Exhibits 2011–2013 and 2016–2019. Exhibits 2012, 2013, 2017, and 2019
`were not cited in the Final Decision. Some portions of Exhibits 2011, 2016,
`and 2018 cited in the Final Decision are not redacted in the publicly
`available versions of these exhibits. The portions of Exhibits 2011, 2016,
`and 2018 that are redacted and cited in the Final Decision are not necessary
`for understanding the basis of our decision on patentability.
`We determine that it is also appropriate to expunge Papers 42 and 51
`and the sealed version of Exhibit 2034. The sealed portions of Exhibit 2034
`and Papers 42 and 51 relate primarily to the volume of sales of
`Hendrickson’s TIREMAAX® PRO and TIREMAAX® CP systems from
`2008 to 2013, and also discuss cost and pricing information for these
`products. See Motion 7–8. The Motion characterizes this information as
`“Hendrickson’s most confidential competitive and sensitive internal
`information” and “highly confidential.” Id. The parties argue “[t]he exact
`numbers cited are unnecessary either to Patent Owner’s general position or
`to the Board’s Final Written Decision, and the general public has no
`particular interest in Hendrickson’s exact product sales or profit margins.”
`Id. at 8. The parties also contend “the unredacted portions of Patent
`Owner’s Revised Response adequately support the portion of the Board’s
`Final Written Decision with regard to the relative sales and profitability of
`those two products” and “the Board has quoted in its decision non-
`confidential portions of the redacted pages.” Id.
`The arguments in the Motion present a weak showing of any concrete
`harm that would result upon public disclosure of the sales and pricing
`information in Exhibit 2034 and Papers 42 and 51, especially considering
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`
`the age of this information. On the other hand, we agree with the parties that
`the portions of the redacted pages quoted in the Board’s Final Decision
`provide the public with sufficient explanation of the basis of the decision.
`Thus, on balance, here we determine that public interest in the exact sales
`and pricing numbers in the redacted portions of Exhibit 2034 and Papers 42
`and 51 is outweighed by Hendrickson’s interest in maintaining the
`confidentiality of that information.
`Paper 34 is an earlier version of Patent Owner’s Response that was
`filed under seal. Although Paper 34 was superseded by the Revised Patent
`Owner’s Response (Papers 41, 42), it was not expunged. Because Paper 34
`contains essentially the same information that the Motion to Expunge asserts
`is confidential in Paper 42, we consider omission of Paper 34 from the
`Motion to be inadvertent. Paper 34 is appropriate to be expunged for the
`same reasons as Paper 42, and because Paper 42 supersedes Paper 34.
`
`
`II. ORDER
`For the reasons given, it is
`ORDERED that the Final Written Decision be issued in its entirety as
`a public document;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Expunge is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that only sealed versions of Exhibits 2011–
`2013, 2016–2019, and 2034 are expunged;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Papers 34, 42, and 51 are expunged.
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01510
`Patent 7,669,465 B2
`
`PETITIONERS:
`Michael G. Babbitt
`Timothy J. Barron
`Sara Tonnies Horton
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`mbabbitt@jenner.com
`tbarron@j enner.com
`shorton@jenner.com
`chgoip@jenner.com
`
`Paul J. Ripp
`David L. Applegate
`Jonathan E. Grossman
`WILLIAMS MONTGOMERY & JOHN LTD
`pjr@willmont.com
`dla@willmont.com
`jeg@willmont.com
`
`Lloyd G. Farr
`NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP
`lloyd.farr@nelsonmullins.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Vivek Ganti
`John North
`Jennifer Calvert
`vg@hkw-law.com
`jln@hkw-law.com
`jc@hkw-law.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
