UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`
`~ Patent Owner
`
`Case CBM2012-00003
`
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`Before the Honorable JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, and MICHAEL R.
`
`ZECHER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO H/IC VICE ADMISSION OF JAMES R.
`MYERS
`
`Pursuant to Rule 42.l0(c), and as authorized in the Board’s Order on the
`
`Conduct of the Proceeding (Paper 19), Petitioner Liberty Mutual Insurance
`
`Company (“Liberty Mutual”) respectfully requests pro hac vice admission of
`
`James R. Myers as counsel in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`
`~ Patent Owner
`
`Case CBM2012-00003
`
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`Before the Honorable JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, and MICHAEL R.
`
`ZECHER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO H/IC VICE ADMISSION OF JAMES R.
`MYERS
`
`Pursuant to Rule 42.l0(c), and as authorized in the Board’s Order on the
`
`Conduct of the Proceeding (Paper 19), Petitioner Liberty Mutual Insurance
`
`Company (“Liberty Mutual”) respectfully requests pro hac vice admission of
`
`James R. Myers as counsel in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Time for Filing
`
`This Motion is timely because it is being filed no sooner than twenty one
`
`(21) days after service of the Petition in this proceeding, which occurred on
`
`September 16,2012.
`
`Statement of Facts
`
`The following statement of facts demonstrates that there is good cause for
`
`the Board to recognize James R. Myers as counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Myers is an experienced litigation attorney and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. Mr. Myers has been
`
`practicing law since 1976 and has extensive experience litigating patent
`
`infringement cases in many different District Courts across the country. Among
`
`his experience in patent litigation matters, Mr. Myers has been lead counsel in
`
`multiple trials, Markman hearings, patent summary judgment proceedings, and
`
`other patent-related hearings and pleadings concerning, inter alia, patent validity
`
`and infringement issues. Mr. Myers has also been recognized as a leading patent
`
`litigation attorney by several different organizations, including Who ’s Who in
`
`America, Who ’s Who in American Law, Who ’s Who in the World, Euromoney’s
`
`Guide to the World ’s Leading Patent Law Experts, Intellectual Asset Magazine
`
`Patent 1 000, and ThomsonReuters Washington DC Super Lawyers.
`
`
`
`Mr. Myers is familiar with U.S. Patent No. 8,140,358 (“the ‘358 Patent”)
`
`and the issues involved in this case. Mr. Myers has been representing Liberty
`
`Mutual against Patent Owner Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. (“Progressive”)
`
`as lead counsel in pending District Court litigation since June 2010 when
`
`Progressive first filed its infringement action involving its telematics patent
`
`portfolio against Liberty Mutual—asserting U.S. Patent No. 6,064,970, a direct
`
`parent to the ‘358 Patent. Mr. Myers has been actively involved as lead counsel
`
`for Liberty Mutual throughout the life of the District Court case, including since
`
`August 2012 when Progressive amended its complaint to add assertions of patent
`
`infringement involving the ‘358 Patent. As lead counsel in the District Court
`
`litigation, Mr. Myers has, among other things, been heavily involved with forming
`
`non-infringement and invalidity positions against Progressive’s telematics patent
`
`portfolio. Accordingly, Liberty Mutual prefers that Mr. Myers continue as counsel
`
`in this CBM proceeding as well; and, further, Progressive does not oppose Mr.
`
`Myers being admitted pro hac vice.
`
`Declaration of James R. Myers
`
`As directed by the Board, this Motion is also accompanied by the
`
`Declaration of James R. Myers in Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`attesting to the requirements laid out in the Board’s Order Authorizing Motion for
`
`Pro Hac Vice Admission in Case IPR2013—00010 (MPT) (Paper 6).
`
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons as well as the reasons contained in the attached
`
`declaration, Liberty Mutual respectfully requests admission of James R. Myers as
`
`counsel pro hac vice.
`
`Dated: March 14,2013
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /Nicole M. Jantzi/
`J. Steven Baughman, Lead Counsel
`Nicole M. Jantzi
`
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
`Prudential Tower
`
`800 Boylston Street
`Boston, Massachusetts 02199-3600
`Steven.bau g,l11112111_@__1'_opesgraycom
`NlC()lB.j_Ejt_Zl @.1'o13esg1'ay.com
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner Liberty Mutual
`Insurance Co.
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Case CBM2012-00003
`
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`Before the Honorable JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, and MICHAEL R.
`
`ZECHER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES R. MYERS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR
`
`PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`
`I, James R. Myers, being duly sworn and upon oath, hereby attest to the
`
`following:
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bars of Virginia, Massachusetts, and
`
`the District of Columbia.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`I have never been denied an application for admission to practice before any
`
`
`
`No sanction or contempt citation has ever been imposed against me by any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`I have read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and
`
`the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of the Code of Federal
`
`Regulations.
`
`I will be subject to the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility set forth
`
`in 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. §
`
`l1.l9(a).
`
`I have not applied to appear pro hac vice before the Office in the last three
`
`(3) years, except that, concurrently with the present Motion and Declaration, I
`
`intend to file motions to apply to appear pro hac vice before the Office in two (2)
`
`other pending CBM proceedings involving Liberty Mutual—Cases CBM20l2—
`
`00002 and CBM2012-00004.
`
`I am an experienced litigation attorney having familiarity with the subject
`
`matter at issue in this proceeding.
`
`I have been practicing law since 1976 and have
`
`extensive experience litigating patent infringement cases in many different District
`
`Courts across the country, including participation in multiple trials, Markman
`
`hearings, patent summary judgment proceedings, and other patent-related hearings
`
`and pleadings concerning, inter alia, patent validity and/or infringement.
`
`I have
`
`received professional recognition in the field of patent litigation by several
`
`
`
`different organizations, including Who ’s Who in America, Who ’s Who in American
`
`Law, Who ’s Who in the World, Euromoney’s Guide to the World ’s Leading Patent
`
`Law Experts, Intellectual Asset Magazine Patent 1000, and ThomsonReuters
`
`Washington DC Super Lawyers.
`
`I am very familiar with U.S. Patent No. 8,140,358
`
`(“the ‘358 Patent”) and the issues involved in this case.
`
`I have represented Liberty
`
`Mutual against Progressive as lead counsel in pending District Court litigation
`
`since June 2010 when Progressive first filed its infringement action involving its
`
`telematics patent portfolio against Liberty Mutual—asserting U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,064,970, a direct parent to the ‘358 Patent.
`
`I have been actively involved as lead
`
`counsel for Liberty Mutual throughout the life of the District Court case, including
`
`since August 2012 when Progressive amended its complaint to add assertions of
`
`patent infringement involving the ‘358 Patent against Liberty Mutual. As lead
`
`counsel in the District Court litigation, I have, among other things, been heavily
`
`involved with forming non—infringement and invalidity positions against
`
`Progressive’s telematics patent portfolio.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed
`
`(/4"/€122’,
`
`James R. Myers
`
`
`
`this 14th day of March, 2013, in Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing UNOPPOSED
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF JAMES R. MYERS and
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES R. MYERS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRO
`
`HAC VICE ADMISSION was served on March 14, 2013, to the following
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner via e-mail, pursuant to the parties’ agreement
`
`concerning service:
`
`Calvin P. Griffith, Lead Counsel
`James L. Wamsley, III
`John V. Biemacki
`
`JONES DAY
`
`North Point
`
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1190
`cpgriff1th@jonesday.com
`j lwamsleviii@j onesday.com
`i vbiemack'i@ionesday.com
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.
`
`/s/ Darrell W. Stark
`
`Darrell W. Stark
`
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
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
