`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`CYANOTECH CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`v.
`THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`
`Case IPR2013-004011
`
`Patent 5,527,533
`
`____________
`
`
`Before SCOTT E. KAMHOLZ, SHERIDAN K. SNEDDEN, and
`GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`____________
`
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`ROBERT A. ROWAN UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`____________
`
`
`Submitted: June 11, 2014
`
`
`
`1 Consolidated with Case IPR2013-00404
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Robert A. Rowan
`
`
`IPR2013-00401
`Patent No. 5,527,533
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Petitioner (Cyanotech Corporation), by
`
`and through its attorneys, hereby respectfully moves for the pro hac vice admission
`
`of Robert A. Rowan, litigation counsel for the co-pending patent lawsuit
`
`concerning the same parties and the same patent in the Middle District of Florida.
`
`Petitioner has already conferred with Patent Owner about this motion and Patent
`
`Owner is unopposed to its filing. In support of this motion, Petitioner states as
`
`follows:
`
`Good cause exists under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) for the pro hac vice admission
`
`of Robert A. Rowan as co-counsel in this matter. Mr. Rowan represents
`
`defendants Cyanotech Corporation and Nutrex Hawaii, Inc. in an ongoing patent
`
`infringement action in the Middle District of Florida (12-cv-366, filed June 29,
`
`2012) (“the Florida Litigation”). The Florida Litigation involves the same parties
`
`as this action (the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois and Cyanotech
`
`Corporation) and the same patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,527,533 (“the ‘533 patent”)).
`
`The Florida Litigation has been ongoing for almost two years, and the parties have
`
`invested significant time and financial resources in litigating the validity of the
`
`‘533 patent. See also Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`
`Litigation Counsel, Paper 19) (“For example, in the Florida Litigation the parties
`
`have exchanged validity contentions, filed claim construction briefs, conducted a
`
`deposition of a claim construction expert, and engaged in discovery regarding
`
`1
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Robert A. Rowan
`
`
`IPR2013-00401
`Patent No. 5,527,533
`
`
`
`validity, including the production and review of thousands of documents.”) Mr.
`
`Rowan was the lead attorney with respect to each of these activities. As a result,
`
`Mr. Rowan has developed an intimate familiarity with the ‘533 patent and its
`
`validity, and Petitioner wishes to have its existing litigation counsel continue
`
`representing Petitioner in this matter before the Board. Moreover, Mr. Rowan has
`
`reviewed all relevant filings in IPR2013-00401, attended the most recent
`
`conference call with the Board, and is familiar with the case at this stage of the
`
`proceeding.
`
`Pursuant to the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Joseph A. Rhoa, a
`
`registered practitioner, will remain as lead counsel in this matter. Mr. Rhoa is a
`
`partner at Nixon & Vanderhye P.C., the same law firm that is representing
`
`Cyanotech Corporation in the ongoing Florida Litigation.
`
`Pursuant to the requirements of the “Order Authorizing Motion for Pro
`
`Hac Vice Admission” in Case IPR2013-00639 (superseding the similar Order in
`
`Case IPR2013-00010), this Motion is also supported by the attached Declaration of
`
`Robert A. Rowan (Exhibit A).
`
`For the foregoing reasons, and in view of the Declaration submitted
`
`herewith, Petitioner submits that good cause exists for the pro hac vice admission
`
`of Robert A. Rowan and respectfully requests that the Board grant this motion.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Robert A. Rowan
`
`
`IPR2013-00401
`Patent No. 5,527,533
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JAR:caj
`Nixon & Vanderhye P.C.
`901 North Glebe Road, 11th Floor
`Arlington, VA 22203-1808
`Telephone: (703) 816-4000
`Facsimile: (703) 816-4100
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`By: /Joseph A. Rhoa/
`Joseph A. Rhoa
`Reg. No. 37,515
`Counsel for Petitioner Cyanotech
`Corporation
`
`3
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Robert A. Rowan
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00401
`Patent No. 5,527,533
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify service of the foregoing Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac
`
`Vice Admission of Robert A. Rowan to the following counsel for patent owner on
`
`June 11, 2014 via email (pursuant to agreement between the parties):
`
`Mark D. Schuman
`Iain A. McIntrye
`Todd S. Werner
`Peter M. Kohlhepp
`CARLSON CASPERS
`225 South Sixth Street, Suite 4200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(mschuman@carlsoncaspers.com)
`(imcintyre@carlsoncaspers.com)
`(twerner@carlsoncaspers.com)
`(pkohlhepp@carlsoncaspers.com)
`
`
`
`
`By: /Joseph A. Rhoa/
`Joseph A. Rhoa
`Reg. No. 37,515
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`