Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 39
`Entered: February 16, 2023
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`RESTEM, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`JADI CELL, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, ROBERT A. POLLOCK, and
`DEVON ZASTROW NEWMAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`NEWMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion to Submit Supplemental Information
`37 C.F.R. § 42.123(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 39
`Entered: February 16, 2023
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`RESTEM, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`JADI CELL, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ, ROBERT A. POLLOCK, and
`DEVON ZASTROW NEWMAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`NEWMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion to Submit Supplemental Information
`37 C.F.R. § 42.123(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`Jadi Cell, LLC, (“Patent Owner”) filed a Motion to Submit
`Supplemental Information. Paper 34 (“Motion”). Patent Owner asserts that
`Restem, LLC, (“Petitioner”) does not oppose the motion. Id. Upon
`consideration of the documents and the Parties’ arguments, and for the
`reasons stated below, the Motion is granted.
`II. ANALYSIS
`Patent Owner “moves to submit erratas to the deposition transcripts of
`Patent Owner’s experts Dr. Kristine Krafts and Dr. Scott Burger as evidence
`and supplemental information.” Motion 1. Specifically, Patent Owner
`explains that they submitted declarations from Dr. Krafts and Dr. Burger
`with their Preliminary Response and that Petitioner deposed Dr. Krafts and
`Dr. Burger. Id. at 2. Petitioner filed transcripts of the depositions with their
`Reply. Id. at 2–3. Patent Owner seeks to file erratas for those transcripts.
`Id. at 3–4.
`More than one month has passed since we instituted inter partes
`review in our Decision dated April 20, 2022. Paper 8. Therefore, Patent
`Owner addresses the requirements for filing supplemental information under
`37 C.F.R. § 42.123(b), which states:
`A party seeking to submit supplemental information more than
`one month after the date the trial is instituted, must request
`authorization to file a motion to submit the information. The
`motion to submit supplemental information must show why the
`supplemental information reasonably could not have been
`obtained earlier, and that consideration of the supplemental
`information would be in the interests-of-justice.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`
`Specifically, Patent Owner asserts that they were granted
`authorization on or about January 3, 2023. Motion 4. Patent Owner
`contends that Petitioner deposed Dr. Krafts on September 26, 2022, and Dr.
`Burger on September 16, 2022. Id. at 2. Patent Owner states that they did
`not receive the transcripts of those depositions until they were filed with
`Petitioner’s Reply on October 5, 2022. Id. at 2–3 (citing Ex. 2041 ¶ 1).
`Patent Owner’s counsel then sent the transcripts to Dr. Krafts and Dr. Burger
`for review. Id. at 3 (citing Ex. 2041 ¶ 2). Dr. Krafts was able to promptly
`review her transcript but Dr. Burger’s review was delayed due to medical
`issues. Id. at 3, 5 (citing Ex. 2041 ¶¶ 3–5).
`Patent Owner states that they served Petitioner’s counsel with copies
`of the erratas. Id. at 3, 6 (citing Ex. 2041 ¶ 6; Ex. 2039, 3). Petitioner
`agreed not to oppose the Motion if Patent Owner corrected one word entered
`by the court reporter. Id. (citing Ex. 2041 ¶¶ 7–8). According to Patent
`Owner, Dr. Burger agreed with the correction suggested by Petitioner’s
`counsel and Dr. Burger’s errata was amended accordingly. Id. at 3–4 (citing
`Ex. 2041 ¶ 9).
`Patent Owner further argues that consideration of the erratas will
`serve the interests of justice because they “will ensure that the complete
`record related to these transcripts is available for the Board to review and
`consider and will ensure an equitable and fair review and consideration of
`the evidence.” Id. at 6.
`We are persuaded that Patent Owner has met its burden because it
`satisfies the requirements of § 42.123(b). We agree that Patent Owner
`received authorization to file the Motion. Ex. 3005. Based on the assertions
`made in the Motion and the testimony in the accompanying declaration by
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`Patent Owner’s counsel, Patent Owner could not have reasonably obtained
`the erratas earlier due to Dr. Burger’s medical issue and due to when the
`transcripts were filed. Finally, we agree that consideration of the erratas
`would be in the interests of justice because they would provide a more
`complete record and consideration of evidence.
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner has met its burden of proving
`it is entitled to the requested relief. Accordingly, Patent Owner’s motion to
`submit supplemental information is granted.
`III. ORDER
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion to Submit Supplemental
`Information is granted; and
`FURTHER that Patent Owner is authorized to enter the deposition
`erratas into the record of this proceeding, on or before February 23, 2023.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01535
`Patent 9,803,176 B2
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Kevin Hooper
`Ethan Fitzpatrick
`BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
`kchooper@bryancave.com
`ethan.fitzpatrick@bryancave.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jed Hansen
`Steven Gray
`THORPE NORTH WESTERN LLP
`hansen@tnw.com
`steven.gray@tnw.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
