`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 10
`
` Entered: November 15, 2013
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`NUVASIVE, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`WARSAW ORTHOPEDIC, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00396
`Patent 8,444,696
`_______________
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, LORA M. GREEN, and STEPHEN C. SIU,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
` 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`NuVasive, Inc. (“NuVasive”) filed a motion for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Frank E. Scherkenbach. Paper 9. The motion is unopposed. The motion is
`
`granted.
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00396
`Patent 8,444,696
`
`
`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 4.
`
`In its motion, NuVasive states that there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize Mr. Scherkenbach pro hac vice during this proceeding, because Mr.
`
`Scherkenbach 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. Scherkenbach is counsel for NuVasive in related litigation between
`
`Warsaw and NuVasive. Mr. Scherkenbach made an affidavit attesting to, and
`
`explaining, these facts. Exhibit 1113. The affidavit complies with the
`
`requirements set forth in the Notice.
`
`Upon consideration, NuVasive has demonstrated that Mr. Scherkenbach has
`
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent NuVasive in this
`
`proceeding. Moreover, the Board recognizes that there is a need for NuVasive to
`
`have its related litigation counsel involved in this proceeding. Accordingly,
`
`NuVasive has also established that there is good cause for admitting Mr.
`
`Scherkenbach.
`
`Attention is directed to the Office’s Final Rule adopting new Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct. See Changes to Representation of Others Before the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office; Final Rule, 78 Fed. Reg. 20180 (Apr.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00396
`Patent 8,444,696
`
`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.
`
`Scherkenbach is subject to the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct that took
`
`effect May 3, 2013.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that the NuVasive motion for pro hac vice admission of Frank
`
`E. Scherkenbach for this proceeding is granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that NuVasive is to continue to have a registered
`
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Scherkenbach 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. Scherkenbach 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00396
`Patent 8,444,696
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Stephen Schaefer
`Michael Hawkins
`Fish and Richardson PC
`schaefer@fr.com
`hawkins@fr.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Thomas Martin
`Wesley Meinerding
`Martin and Ferraro LLP
`tmartin@martinferraro.com
`wmeinerding@martinferraro.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`