Filed on behalf of Patent Owner Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc.
`
`By: Robert G. Mukai, Esq.
`BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC
`
`1737 King Street, Suite 500
`Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2727
`Telephone (703) 836-6620
`Facsimile (703) 836-2021
`robert.mukai@bipc.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AVAYA INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`NETWORK-1 SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent 6,218,930
`Administrative Patent Judges Jameson Lee, Joni Y. Chang and Justin T. Arbes
`
`Case IPR2013—0007 1
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`
`OF GREG DOVEL, ESQ.
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. 42.10
`
`A
`
`
`
`By: Robert G. Mukai, Esq.
`BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC
`
`1737 King Street, Suite 500
`Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2727
`Telephone (703) 836-6620
`Facsimile (703) 836-2021
`robert.mukai@bipc.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AVAYA INC.
`
`Petitioner
`
`V.
`
`NETWORK-1 SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent 6,218,930
`Administrative Patent Judges Jameson Lee, Joni Y. Chang and Justin T. Arbes
`
`Case IPR2013—0007 1
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`
`OF GREG DOVEL, ESQ.
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. 42.10
`
`A
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00071
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,218,930
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`
`The Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board recognize Mr. Greg
`
`Dovel as counse1Pro Hac Vice for the above-captioned proceeding in accordance
`
`with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10.‘
`
`1.
`
`Time for Filing
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is being filed no sooner than
`
`twenty one (21) days after service of the petition as required by the Order
`
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice entered December 13, 2012.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts
`
`As required by the Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice, the
`
`following statement of facts shows that there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize Mr. Dovel pro hac vice.
`
`Mr. Dovel is an experienced litigation attorney, and has been involved in
`
`numerous litigations involving patent infringement in District Courts across the
`
`country. Mr. Dovel’s biography is attached (Exhibit B) to the accompanying
`
`Declaration of Mr. Greg Dovel, Esq. (Exhibit A). He is and has been a litigation
`
`attorney for 24 years — since 1988. He has represented a wide range of clients in
`
`business litigation matters and has focused on patent litigation since 2000. See,
`
`Exhibit A, §1.
`
`' A corresponding Motion has been concurrently filed in related, co-pending Inter Partes Review IPR2013~00092.
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00071
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,218,930
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`He graduated Harvard Law School (J.D. 1986, Magna Cum Laude), and then
`
`served as law clerk to Ninth Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace. He also clerked for
`
`Chief Justice Warren E. Burger and Associate Justice Antonin Scalia of the United
`
`States Supreme Court. He was a litigation associate and then partner at Kave,
`
`Scholer, F ierrnan, Haves & Handler in Los Angeles, before leaving to form his
`
`own firm (Dovel and Luner) in 1995. See, Exhibit A, §l.
`
`He has been lead counsel on over thirty (30) patent cases and litigated a
`
`number of them through trial and has conducted oral arguments on six (6) patent
`
`cases before the Federal Circuit. See, Exhibit A, §2.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,218,930 is currently asserted against Petitioner Avaya Inc.
`
`in a co-pending litigation, Network—1 Security Solutions, Inc. v. Alcatel—Lucent
`
`USA Inc., et al., Case No. 6:11 cv 492 (E.D. Tex. Filed Sept. 15, 2011), Hon.
`
`Leonard Davis presiding (“the co-pending litigation”). Further, this patent was
`
`asserted in settled litigation Network—1 Security Solutions, Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`
`Inc., et at. Case No. 6:08 cv 030 (E.D.Tex). Mr. Dovel is lead counsel for the co-
`
`pending litigation and was lead counsel for the settled litigation for the present
`
`Patent Owner, Network—1 Security Solutions, Inc. In the Cisco litigation, Mr.
`
`Dovel conducted the Markman hearing in which the claim terms of the ‘930 Patent
`
`were construed; deposed the Defendant’s technical expert relating to the validity of
`
`
`
`Case No. lPR20l3-00071
`
`‘US. Patent No. 6,218,930
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`the ‘93O Patent; and tried the Cisco Litigation to a jury, including opening
`
`statement, direct examination of Network-1 ’s technical expert and cross-
`
`examination of the Defendant’s technical expert. Exhibit A,‘ §§ 5, 6 and 7.
`
`As such, he has a well-established familiarity with the subject matter at issue
`
`in this proceeding. Patent Owner has expended significant financial resources in
`
`the co-pending litigation and prior litigation with Mr. Dovel as lead counsel, and
`
`Patent Owner wishes to continue using Mr. Dovel as counsel in this proceeding.
`
`III. Affidavit or Declaration of Individual Seeking to Appear
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is accompanied by an Declaration
`
`of Mr. Greg Dovel (Exhibit A) as required by the Notice of Filing Date Accorded
`
`to Petition entered December 13, 2012. In this Declaration, he states compliance
`
`with the general requirements for pro hac vice admission including that he is a
`
`member in good standing of the Bar of the State of California and admitted to
`
`practice before the United States Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals
`
`for the Ninth Circuit and the Federal Circuit, and six federal District Courts; he has
`
`never been suspended, disbarred, sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body; he has never had a court or administrative body deny his
`
`application for admission to practice; he has never had sanctions or contempt
`
`citations imposed on him by any court or administrative body; he has read and will
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00071
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,218,930
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`comply with Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice
`
`for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of the C.F.R. § § 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary
`
`jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a); he agrees to be subject to the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37
`
`C.F.R. § § 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § ll.l9(a);
`
`and in the past three (3) years, he has not appeared pro hac vice in any proceedings
`
`before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Exhibit A, §§ 8—14.
`
`In light of the foregoing, Petitioner respectfully submits that there is good
`
`cause for the Board to recognize Mr. Dovel as counsel pro hae vice during this
`
`proceeding.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Date: January 25, 2013
`
`By: n?n , W‘
`
`BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY P C
`
`1737 King Street, Suite 500
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`Telephone (703) 836-6620
`
`Robert G. Mukai, Esq.
`Registration No. 28,531
`Counselfor NETWORK—I SECURITY
`SOLUTIONS, INC.
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00071
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,218,930
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION
`
`FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF GREG DOVEL, ESQ. PURSUANT
`
`TO 37 C.F.R. 42.10 is being served upon the following this 25th day of January
`
`2013, Via EXPRESS MAIL mail to:
`
`Jeffrey D. Sanok
`Jonathan Lindsay
`CROWELL & MORING LLP
`
`Intellectual Property Group
`1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20004-2595
`
`and electronically Via e—mail: AVl—PRPS@Crowell.corn
`
`Date: January 25, 2013
`
`/21.../A pAý
`
`Robert G. Mukai, Esq.
`Registration No. 28,531
`Counselfor NETWORK—I SECURITY
`SOLUTIONS, INC.
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
