`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 17
`
` Entered: May 14, 2013
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`INNOLUX CORPORATION1
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`SEMICONDUCTOR ENERGY LABORATORY CO., LTD.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00064 (SCM)
`Patent 7,923,311 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KARL D. EASTHOM, and KEVIN F. TURNER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
` 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`Innolux Corporation (“Innolux”) filed a motion for pro hac vice admission
`
`
`1 In light of Petitioner’s name change (Paper 10), the parties shall use the above
`header on all subsequent papers filed in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00064
`Patent 7,923,311 B2
`
`of Stanley M. Gibson. Paper 16. The motion is unopposed. The motion is
`granted.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may recognize counsel pro hac
`vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. In authorizing motions
`for pro hac vice, the Board requires the moving party to provide a statement of
`facts showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice
`and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to appear in this
`proceeding. “Notice”; Paper 3.
`In its motion, Innolux states that there is good cause for the Board to
`recognize Mr. Gibson pro hac vice during this proceeding, because Mr. Gibson is
`an experienced litigating attorney with an established familiarity with the subject
`matter at issue in the proceeding. In addition, the motion states that Mr. Gibson is
`counsel for Innolux in related litigation between Innolux and the patent owner.
`Mr. Gibson made a declaration attesting to, and explaining, these facts. Paper 14.2
` The declaration complies with the requirements set forth in the Notice.
`Upon consideration, Innolux has demonstrated that Mr. Gibson has
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Innolux in this proceeding.
` Moreover, the Board recognizes that there is a need for Innolux to have its related
`litigation counsel involved in this proceeding. Accordingly, Innolux has also
`established that there is good cause for admitting Mr. Gibson.
`Attention is directed to the Office’s Final Rule adopting new Rules of
`
`
`2 Although Innolux filed the declaration as a separate paper, the paper should have
`been uploaded as an exhibit with an appropriate exhibit number. 37 C.F.R.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00064
`Patent 7,923,311 B2
`
`Professional Conduct. See Changes to Representation of Others Before the
`United States Patent and Trademark Office; Final Rule, 78 Fed. Reg. 20180 (Apr.
`3, 2013). The Final Rule also removes Part 10 of Title 37, Code of Federal
`Regulations. The changes set forth in that Final Rule including the USPTO’s
`Rules of Professional Conduct took effect on May 3, 2013. Therefore, Mr. Gibson
`is subject to the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct that took effect May 3,
`2013.
`
`It is
`ORDERED that the Innolux motion for pro hac vice admission of Stanley
`M. Gibson for this proceeding is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Innolux is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Gibson is to comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth
`in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Gibson is subject to the Office’s
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the USPTO Rules of
`Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`§ 42.63.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00064
`Patent 7,923,311 B2
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Scott A. McKeown
`Gregory S. Cordrey
`OBLON, SPIVAK, McCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.
`cpdocketmckeown@oblon.com
`gcordrey@jmbm.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Mark J. Murphy
`Edward D. Manzo
`HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP
`Mark.murphy@huschblackwell.com
`Edward.manzo@huschblackwell.com
`
`Stanley A. Schlitter
`Douglas R. Peterson
`STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
`sschlitt@steptoe.com
`dpeterson@steptoe.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`