`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 49
`Date: January 13, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`ETHICON LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2019-00991
`Patent 8,602,287 B2
`
`
`Before JOSIAH C. COCKS, ZHENYU YANG, and
`JOHN E. SCHNEIDER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`YANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Renewed Motion to Seal
`37 C.F.R. § 42.55
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00991
`Patent 8,602,287 B2
`Patent Owner filed a Renewed Motion to Seal, seeking to seal
`portions of Exhibits 1020, 1021, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2267, and 2299.
`Paper 46. Patent Owner’s Motion is granted.
`There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in an
`inter partes review open to the public, especially because the proceeding
`determines the patentability of claims in an issued patent and, therefore,
`affects the rights of the public. Generally, all papers filed in an inter partes
`review shall be made available to the public. See 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1);
`37 C.F.R. § 42.14. Our rules, however, “aim to strike a balance between the
`public’s interest in maintaining a complete and understandable file history
`and the parties’ interest in protecting truly sensitive information.”
`Consolidated Patent Trial Practice Guide 19. Thus, a party may move to seal
`certain information (37 C.F.R. § 42.14); but only “confidential information”
`is protected from disclosure (35 U.S.C. § 326(a)(7)). Confidential
`information means trade secret or other confidential research, development,
`or commercial information. 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.
` The standard for granting a motion to seal is “for good cause.”
`37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a). The party moving to seal bears the burden of proof and
`must explain why the information sought to be sealed constitutes
`confidential information. 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(c).
`Previously, the parties sought, and we agreed, to seal in their entirety
`Exhibits 2007, 2010–2153, 2155–2163, 2165–2182, 2184–2210, 2213–2264,
`2266, 2268–2298, 2300, 2301, and 2303, and the redacted portions of Patent
`Owner’s Response (Paper 17), Petitioner’s Reply (Paper 26), Patent Owner’s
`Sur-reply (Paper 35), and Exhibits 1023 and 2005. Paper 48, 43–45. We,
`however, denied without prejudice to seal in their entirety Exhibits 1020,
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00991
`Patent 8,602,287 B2
`1021, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2267 and 2299,1 because no redacted public
`version was filed. Id. at 45. We invited Patent Owner to file a renewed
`motion to seal any of these Exhibits, with a narrowly redacted public version
`of each document sought to be sealed. Id. Patent Owner has done so in a
`timely fashion. See Paper 46.
`Upon considering the content of the Exhibits Patent Owner seeks to
`seal, along with Patent Owner’s representations as to the confidentiality of
`the information contained therein, we determine that there is good cause for
`sealing the unreacted version of Exhibits 1020, 1021, 2003, 2004, 2008,
`2009, 2267, and 2299.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Renewed Motion to Seal (Paper 46)
`is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 These are deposition transcripts and declarations of Patent Owner’s expert
`and certain fact witnesses. Paper 48, 43–45.
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00991
`Patent 8,602,287 B2
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Steven Katz
`John Phillips
`Ryan O’Connor
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`katz@fr.com
`phillips@fr.com
`oconnor@fr.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`Anish Desai
`Elizabeth Weiswasser
`Adrian Percer
`Christopher Marando
`Christopher Pepe
`Brian Ferguson
`WEIL, GOTSHAL, & MANGES LLP
`anish.desai@weil.com
`Elizabeth.weiswasser@weil.com
`Adrian.percer@weil.com
`Christopher.marando@weil.com
`Christopher.pepe@weil.com
`brian.ferguson@weil.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
