`571-272-7822
`
`
`
` Paper 12
`
`Entered: November 15, 2012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`BLOOMBERG INC.; BLOOMBERG L.P.; BLOOMBERG FINANCE L.P.;
`THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION;
`CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC.;
`E*TRADE FINANCIAL CORPORATION; E*TRADE SECURITIES LLC;
`E*TRADE CLEARING LLC; OPTIONSXPRESS HOLDINGS INC.;
`OPTIONSXPRESS, INC.; TD AMERITRADE HOLDING CORP.;
`TD AMERITRADE, INC.; TD AMERITRADE IP COMPANY, INC.; and
`THINKORSWIM GROUP INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Patent of MARKETS-ALERT PTY LTD.
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case CBM2013-00005 (JYC)
`Patent 7,941,357
`____________
`
`
`
`
`JONI Y. CHANG, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER – AUTHORIZING MOTION FOR
`PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION – 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00005 (JYC)
`Patent 7,941,357
`
`
`
`The patent owner, Markets-Alert Pty. Ltd. (“Markets-Alert”), has requested
`
`that the Board authorize a motion for pro hac vice admission. Paper 11.
`
`In addition, Markets-Alert filed a motion for Ms. Adrian Pruetz to appear pro hac
`
`vice, accompanied by a declaration of Ms. Pruetz in support of the motion, on
`
`November 13, 2012. Papers 8 and 10.
`
`As set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may recognize counsel pro
`
`hac vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause, subject to the
`
`condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner and to any other conditions
`
`as the Board may impose. For example, where the lead counsel is a registered
`
`practitioner, a motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel who is not a registered
`
`practitioner may be granted upon showing that counsel is an experienced litigating
`
`attorney and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the
`
`proceeding.
`
`Accordingly, the Board authorizes both parties to file motions for pro hac
`
`vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Such motions must be filed in
`
`accordance with “ORDER – AUTHORIZING MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`
`ADMISSION” in Case IPR2013-000010, specifically section 2, “Content of
`
`Motion” on pages 3-4. A copy of that order is provided in the attachment. Parties
`
`seeking to oppose a motion for pro hac vice admission must file their opposition
`
`no later than one week after the later of: (1) the filing of the underlying motion, or
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case CBM2013-00005 (JYC)
`Patent 7,941,357
`
`(2) the date of this order. Further, no reply to any opposition shall be filed unless
`
`/Joni Y. Chang/
`Administrative Patent Judges
`
`
`authorized by the Board.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Michael T. Rosato
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`701 Fifth Avenue
`Suite 5100
`Seattle, WA 98104-7036
`Tel.: 206.883.2529
`Fax: 206.883.2699
`Email: mrosato@wsgr.com
`
`Brian D. Range
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`900 South Capital of Texas Hwy
`Las Cimas IV, Fifth Floor
`Austin, TX 78746-5546
`Tel.: 512.338.5478
`Fax: 512.338.5499
`Email: brange@wsgr.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Andrew Choung
`GLASER WEIL FINK JACOBS HOWARD AVCHEN & SHAPIRO LLP
`10250 Constellation Boulevard, 19th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90067
`Tel.: 310-553-3000
`Fax: 310-785-3506
`Email: achoung@glaserweil.com
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 6
`
`Entered: October 15, 2012
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Patent of MICHAEL ARNOUSE
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00010 (MPT)
`Patent 7,516,484
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before JAMES DONALD SMITH, Chief Administrative Patent Judge, JAMES T.
`MOORE, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge, MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, Lead
`Administrative Patent Judge,1 and JAMESON LEE, SALLY G. LANE, SALLY C.
`MEDLEY, JONI Y. CHANG, THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, and BRIAN J.
`McNAMARA, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`TIERNEY, Lead Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER – AUTHORIZING MOTION FOR
`PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION – 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`1 Judge Tierney serves as lead judge of the Board’s Trial Section.
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00010
`Patent 7,516,484
`
`
`
`Motorola Mobility, LLC (“Motorola”) has requested that the Board
`
`authorize a motion for pro hac vice admission. Petition, Paper 2 at 2. Specifically,
`
`Motorola requests that the Board authorize a motion for Steven D. Moore to appear
`
`pro hac vice. According to Motorola, Mr. Moore is an experienced litigating
`
`attorney and is familiar with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding as Mr.
`
`Moore is lead counsel in a concurrent litigation involving the same patent as that
`
`challenged in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Section 42.10(c) of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) provides that:
`
`The Board may recognize counsel pro hac vice during a proceeding
`upon a showing of good cause, subject to the condition that lead
`counsel be a registered practitioner and to any other conditions as the
`Board may impose. For example, where the lead counsel is a
`registered practitioner, a motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel
`who is not a registered practitioner may be granted upon showing that
`counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`The Board authorizes both parties to file motions for pro hac vice admission
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) as follows:
`
` 1.
`
`
`
`Time for Filing
`
`The time for filing pro hac vice motions is no sooner than twenty one (21)
`
`days after service of the petition, which is the time for filing patent owner
`
`mandatory notices. Parties seeking to oppose a motion for pro hac vice admission
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00010
`Patent 7,516,484
`
`must file their opposition no later than one week after the filing of the underlying
`
`motion. No reply to any opposition shall be filed unless authorized by the Board.
`
` 2.
`
` A
`
`
`
`Content of Motion
`
`motion for pro hac vice admission must:
`
`a.
`
`Contain a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board
`
`to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding.
`
`
`
`b.
`
`Be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the individual
`
`seeking to appear attesting to the following:
`
`
`
`i. Membership in good standing of the Bar of at least one State or the
`
`District of Columbia;
`
`
`
`ii. No suspensions or disbarments from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body;
`
`
`
`iii. No application for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body ever denied;
`
`iv. No sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court or
`
`administrative body;
`
`v. The individual seeking to appear has 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 C.F.R.;
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00010
`Patent 7,516,484
`
`
`vi. The individual 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. § 11.19(a);
`
`vii. All other proceedings before the Office for which the individual
`
`has applied to appear pro hac vice in the last three (3) years; and
`
`viii. Familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
` c.
`
`Where the affiant or declarant is unable to provide any of the
`
`information requested above in part 2(b) or make any of the required statements or
`
`representations under oath, the individual should provide a full explanation of the
`
`circumstances as part of the affidavit or declaration.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`