直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

At the PTAB Blog

PTAB to Consider Motions for Sanctions Against Kyle Bass and the Coalition for Affordable Drugs

June 17, 2015

Authored and Edited by Linda J. Thayer; Maureen D. Queler

The Board may soon rule on whether the Petitions for Inter Partes Review filed by the Coalition for Affordable Drugs VI, LLC (IPR2015-01092, -1096, -1102, and -1103) against certain patents owned by Celgene Corporation amount to an abuse of process deserving of sanctions. On June 9, 2015, the Board authorized Celgene to file motions for sanctions with its Patent Owner Preliminary Responses, which are due by July 30, 2015. Petitioner will have ten (10) business days to respond, and the Patent Owner five (5) business days to file a Reply. (Paper 7.)

The Coalition is an entity created by Kyle Bass, a hedge-fund manager, who claims to be targeting various patents of major pharmaceutical companies that he alleges drive up prescription drug prices. Patent Owner Celgene alleges that Mr. Bass and his business partner, Erich Spangenberg, have publicly stated that they intend to use the IPR process for the purpose of affecting the value of public companies, which Celgene alleges is an abuse of process and misuse of the IPR proceedings. By authorizing the filing of the motions for sanctions, the Board stressed that it was not deciding on the merits, but rather  allowing briefing that would “facilitate development of a complete record and, thereby, will promote the just resolution of the issues raised by the Patent Owner.”

Tags

37 C.F.R. § 42.12

Related Practices

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Copyright © 2015 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 

DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. Additional disclaimer information. 

Related Insights

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

Charitable

Banding Together 2026

June 18, 2026

Washington, DC

Charitable

TopGolf for the Troops 2026

June 11, 2026

Ashburn

Seminar

3rd AI, IP, & Legal Forum

June 6, 2026

Shangai

Articles

California Reaches Record $12.75 Million CCPA Settlement with General Motors Over Driver Data

June 4, 2026

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP