[Patentpractice] Revision of Party in Interest in IPR

[Stanley H. Kremen]

How is discovery in an.IPR limited? I plan on deposing their expert. Can I also do the equivalent of a 30(b)(6) deposition? What are my time frame limitations? Can I compel document production?

Thanks in advance. 

Stan Kremen

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 23, 2025, at 7:56 PM, steve--- via Patentpractice <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
> 
> If this is an actual issue in the case, a deposition may be in order.  The
> PTAB is stingy on discovery, so the request needs to be well thought out.
> However, since the discovery is limited, any actual smoking gun will stand
> out, and may put Petitioner on the defensive.
> 
> Very truly yours,
> 
> Steven M. Hoffberg
> Hoffberg & Associates
> 29  Buckout Road
> West Harrison, NY 10604
> (914) 949-2300 tel
> (845) 625-2547 fax
> steve at hoffberglaw.com
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/hoffberg/
> 
> Emails and attachments received from us may be confidential and/or protected
> by the attorney-client privilege, as attorney work-product or based on other
> privileges or provisions of law. If you are not designated as an intended
> recipient of this email, do not read, copy, use, forward or disclose the
> email or any of its attachments to others. Instead, immediately notify the
> sender by replying to this email and then delete it from your system. We
> strictly prohibit any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use
> of emails or attachments sent by us to other than the intended recipient.
> This communication does not create any legal obligations on behalf of the
> sender, unless executed in a manner indicating an intent to be bound.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf
> Of Randall Svihla via Patentpractice
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2025 1:52 PM
> To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal
> advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
> Cc: Randall Svihla <rsvihla at nsiplaw.com>
> Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] Revision of Party in Interest in IPR
> 
> Maybe this will help:
> 
> https://www.akingump.com/en/insights/blogs/ip-newsflash/delay-in-correcting-
> disclosure-of-real-parties-in-interest-not-procedurally-fatal-to-ipr-petitio
> n
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Randall S. Svihla
> NSIP Law
> Washington, D.C.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf
> Of Stanley H. Kremen via Patentpractice
> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2025 1:45 PM
> To: patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
> Cc: Stanley H. Kremen <shk at shk-dplc.com>
> Subject: [Patentpractice] Revision of Party in Interest in IPR
> 
> Colleagues:
> 
> Currently, I am defending a patent in an IPR. A trial was instituted, and I
> replied to the petition. The Petitioner recently changed the identity of the
> real party in interest. Is this allowed?
> 
> Stanley (Stan) Kremen
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> --
> Patentpractice mailing list
> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
> 
> --
> Patentpractice mailing list
> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
> 
> 
> --
> Patentpractice mailing list
> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
>