`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 52
`Entered: June 23, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SIPNET EU S.R.O.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`STRAIGHT PATH IP GROUP, INC.
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00246
`Patent 6,108,704
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before KALYAN K. DESPHANDE, THOMAS L. GIANNETTI. and
`TRENTON A. WARD, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
` .
`
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`MOTION TO WITHDRAW
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(e)
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00246
`Patent 6,108,704
`
`
`
`Petitioner has filed a motion to authorize withdrawal of its current counsel,
`
`Paul C. Haughey and Michael T. Morlock. Paper 46. Petitioner states that the
`
`motion is unopposed. For the following reasons the motion is granted.
`
`
`
`
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`Counsel may withdraw from an inter partes review proceeding only with
`
`authorization from the Board. 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(e). Normally, this is
`
`accomplished by filing a motion to withdraw, which requires Board authorization
`
`before filing. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(b). Once authorization is granted, the motion
`
`is then made by the attorneys seeking to withdraw. See, e.g., Case IPR2013-00010,
`
`Paper 30.
`
`
`
`Here, the motion to withdraw was filed by the Petitioner, and signed by
`
`Messrs. Haughey and Morlock. The motion was authorized in advance by the
`
`Board.
`
`
`
`Petitioner has not followed the correct procedure in that the motion should
`
`have been filed by withdrawing counsel and accompanied by a new power of
`
`attorney. See guidance provided in Paper 7 in this proceeding. However, because
`
`there is no prejudice shown, the Board will treat the motion as if it were filed by
`
`withdrawing counsel.
`
`
`
`Turning to the merits, the motion designates substitute counsel and back-up
`
`counsel who are stated to be registered practitioners and does not seek any time
`
`extensions. In fact, Petitioner affirmatively states that it does not propose any
`
`schedule changes as a result of the substitution. Under the circumstances we see
`
`no reason to deny the motion.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00246
`Patent 6,108,704
`
`
`
`It is therefore
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion (Paper 46) is granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Paul C. Haughey and Michael T. Morlock are
`
`permitted to withdraw as counsel for Petitioner in this proceeding;
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall file a new power of attorney
`
`within five days of entry of this order designating Pavel L. Pogodin and Sanjay
`
`Prasad as lead and back-up counsel, respectively;
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that concurrent with filing the new power of
`
`attorney, Petitioner shall file updated mandatory disclosures designating Messrs.
`
`Pogodin and Prasad as lead and back-up counsel;
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that withdrawal by Mr. Haughey and Mr. Morlock
`
`shall become effective upon filing by Petitioner of the new power of attorney and
`
`updated mandatory disclosures specified above.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00246
`Patent 6,108,704
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Paul C. Haughey
`Michael T. Morlock
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON, LLP
`phaughey@kilpatricktownsend.com
`mmorlock@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Patrick J. Lee
`Alicia Carney
`FISCH SIGLER LLP
`patrick.lee@fischllp.com
`Alicia.carney@fischllp.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
