`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Case CBM2013-00009
`
`Patent 8,140,358
`
`Before the Honorable JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, and MICHAEL R.
`
`ZECHER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF JAMES R.
`
`MYERS
`
`Pursuant to Rule 42.10(c), and as authorized in the Board’s Notice
`
`According Filing Date (Paper 4) and Order on the Conduct of the Proceeding
`
`(Paper 14), Petitioner Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”)
`
`respectfully requests pro hac vice admission of James R. Myers as counsel in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`1.
`
`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
`
`November 19, 2012.
`
`II.
`
`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 attomey 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.
`
`III.
`
`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 IPR20l3-00010 (MPT) (Paper 6), as well the
`
`
`
`requirement set forth in the Board’s Order on the Conduct of the Proceeding (Paper
`
`14) that the pro hac vice applicant will be subject to the USPTO’s new Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct which became effective on May 3, 2013.
`
`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: June 28, 2013
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /J . Steven Baughman/
`J. Steven Baughman, Lead Counsel
`Nicole M. Jantzi
`
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
`Prudential Tower
`
`800 Boylston Street
`Boston, Massachusetts 02199-3 600
`SteVen.baughman@ropesgray.com
`Nicole.jantzi@ropesgraV.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 CBM2013—00OO9
`
`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:
`
`1.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bars of Virginia, Massachusetts, and
`
`the District of Columbia.
`
`2.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`I have never been denied an application for admission to practice before any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`4.
`
`No sanction or contempt citation has ever been imposed against me by any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`5.
`
`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.
`
`6.
`
`I will be subject to the newly adopted USPTO Rules of Professional
`
`Conduct set forth in 78 Fed. Reg. 20180-211 at 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq., which
`
`became effective May 3, 2013 (and which I understand replaced the prior USPTO
`
`Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.20 et seq.). And I
`
`will be subject to the USPTO’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a)
`
`as revised.
`
`7.
`
`In the last three (3) years, I have applied and been admitted to appear pro
`
`hac vice before the Office in five (5) other CBM proceedings involving Liberty
`
`Mutua1——Cases CBM2012-00002, CBM2012-00003, CBM2012-00004,
`
`CBM2012-00010, and CBM2013-00002. Concurrently with the present motion, I
`
`intend to file a motion to apply to appear pro hac vice before the Office in
`
`CBM2013-00004, also involving Liberty Mutual.
`
`
`
`8.
`
`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 14410 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 telernatics patent portfolio.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed
`
`this 28th day of June, 2013, in Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`
`
` 1.-—-/3
`
`
`James R. Myers
`
`
`
`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 June 28, 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. Biernacki
`
`JONES DAY
`
`North Point
`
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`
`Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1190
`c.pg1'iff'1tl1(cz2,ionesday.com
`°lwamsle iii
`'onesda .com
`
`jvbiernacki@jonesday.com
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.
`
`/s/ Jordan M. Rossen
`
`Jordan M. Rossen
`
`ROPES & GRAY LLP