` Filed: March 4, 2019
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MULTI PACKAGING SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CPI CARD GROUP – MINNESOTA, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01650
`Patent 8,419,889 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER,
`and JEFFREY W. ABRAHAM, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to
`Maintain Confidential Information under Seal
`37 C.F.R. § 42.56
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01650
`Patent 8,419,889 B2
`
`
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`On May 7, 2018, the Board granted Petitioner’s unopposed motion to
`seal allegedly confidential documents and, further, granted the parties’ joint
`request for entry of the Board’s default protective order. Paper 25, 7.
`Specifically, we determined that Petitioner established good cause to seal
`information reflected in Patent Owner’s Response (Paper 19) and
`Exhibits 2014–2018 and 2020. Id. at 3–4.
`On January 4, 2019, we entered a Final Written Decision holding that
`all challenged claims—namely, claims 1–30 of U.S. Patent No. 8,419,889
`(“the ’889 patent”)—are unpatentable. Paper 36, 46. On March 1, 2019,
`Patent Owner filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
`Federal Circuit. Paper 40.
`This Order resolves Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to Maintain
`Confidential Information under Seal, which was filed on February 25, 2019,
`after the entry of the Final Written Decision but before the filing of Patent
`Owner’s notice of appeal. Paper 37 (“Mot.”).
`
`II. ANALYSIS
`Petitioner acknowledges that our rules contemplate that sealed
`information ordinarily will become public 45 days after final judgment in a
`trial, unless a motion to expunge is filed during that period. Mot. 4 (citing
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48761 (Aug. 14,
`2012); 37 CFR § 42.56). In this case, our Final Written Decision refers to
`the allegedly confidential information filed under seal, without disclosing
`the confidential substance of that information. Paper 36, 33–35. Although
`we did not specifically credit that information, for purposes of our decision,
`“we assume[d]” that the information demonstrated “that Petitioner did, in
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01650
`Patent 8,419,889 B2
`
`
`fact, copy the claimed invention” of the ’889 patent. Id. at 33. Given the
`particular facts and circumstances presented in this case, we find that good
`cause exists to preserve the record, and maintain the allegedly confidential
`documents under seal, during the pendency of any appeals.
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`Accordingly, we grant Petitioner’s request to extend the deadline to
`file a motion to expunge confidential information to 45 days after the
`conclusion of any appeals (Mot. 4), including the appeal filed by Patent
`Owner on March 1, 2019 (Paper 40).
`
`IV. ORDER
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to Maintain
`Confidential Information under Seal is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the record shall be preserved and the
`documents filed under seal shall not be expunged or made public until after
`the completion of all appeals; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that the documents filed under seal shall be
`unsealed 45 days after the conclusion of all appeals, unless, before that time,
`the parties file a motion to expunge the sealed documents from the record.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01650
`Patent 8,419,889 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Mark Rowland
`Gabrielle Higgins
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`mark.rowland@ropesgray.com
`gabrielle.higgins@ropesgray.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Michael Scheer
`THE LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL J. SCHEER
`mscheer@michaeljscheer.com
`
`Pejman Sharifi
`Louis Campbell
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`psharifi@winston.com
`llcampbell@winston.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
