Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01238/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01238-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

PHIGENIX, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

GENENTECH INC,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-01238-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING GENENTECH'S 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MSJ

[Re: ECF 229]

Before the Court is Genentech’s administrative motion for leave to file a summary 

judgment motion without the motion counting against the Court’s one motion for summary 

judgment allowance. ECF 229. Genentech seeks to file a 12 page motion for summary judgment 

on the grounds that the asserted patent is invalid because (1) the written description for the ’534 

patent does not support the broad “any composition claim” Phigenix has asserted and 2) the 

written description in the 2005 application to which Phigenix claims priority does not support the 

claimed “method of treating a breast condition,” so the asserted claims are not entitled to that 

priority date, and therefore the accused product anticipates because it was in public use more than 

a year before the ’534 patent’s 2010 filing date. Id.

Phigenix opposes the request because it believes Genentech’s motion necessarily involves 

disputed issues of fact and therefore will only serve to burden the parties and the Court. ECF 230. 

In the alternative, Phigenix requests that the Court preclude Genentech from (1) using expert 

declarations with the motion as expert discovery has not yet commenced, (2) raising any issues 

under 35 U.S.C. § 112 in any later motion, and (3) decreasing the page count for any subsequent 

summary judgment motion by 75% of the pages used in the proposed motion (i.e. if Genentech 

files a 12 page motion, any subsequent summary judgment motion will be limited to 16 pages).

Case 5:15-cv-01238-BLF Document 237 Filed 08/09/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

After reviewing the parties’ briefing, the Court GRANTS Genentech’s motion for leave to 

file an early summary judgment motion. The Court SETS the page limits for the early summary 

judgment motion to 12 pages for the opening brief, 12 pages for the opposition brief, and 7 pages 

for the reply brief. Genentech may not raise any issues raised in this summary judgment motion in 

a later motion for summary judgment and the Court reduces the page count for any later filed 

summary judgment motion to 20 pages for the opening and opposition briefs and 12 pages for the 

reply brief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 8, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-01238-BLF Document 237 Filed 08/09/16 Page 2 of 2