`571-272-7822
`
`IPR2013-00593,Paper No. 13
` IPR2013-00594, Paper No. 9
` IPR2013-00597, Paper No. 9
`IPR2013-00598, Paper No. 11
`Date Entered: December 26, 2013
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`YAMAHA CORPORATION OF AMERICA
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BLACK HILLS MEDIA, LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00593
`Patent 8,045,952
`Case IPR2013-00594
`Patent No. 8,050,652
`Case No. IPR2013-00597
`Patent No. 8,230,099
`Case No IPR2013-00598
`Patent No. 8,214,873
`____________
`
`Before, BRIAN J. McNAMARA, STACEY G. WHITE, and PETER P. CHEN,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`McNAMARA, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
`AND REQUIRING PATENT OWNER TO DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL
`COUNSEL
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00593; -00594;-00597;-00598
`Patent 8,045,952; 8,050,652; 8,230,099; 8,214,873
`
`
` Under 37 CFR 42.10, BLACK HILLS MEDIA, LLC (Patent Owner) moves
`for the pro hac vice admission of attorney Reza Mollaaghababa in IPR2013-00593
`(Paper No. 12), in IPR2013-00594 (Paper No. 7), and in IPR2013-00597 (Paper
`No. 6), attorney Thomas Engellenner in IPR2013-00594 (Paper No. 6), in
`IPR2013-00597 (Paper No. 7), and in IPR2013-00598 (Paper No 9), and attorney
`Lana Gladstein (Paper No. 8) in IPR2013-00598. We deny all the subject motions.
`The Board may grant a motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel who is not
`a registered practitioner. 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). The subject motions represent that
`Reza Mollaaghababa, Thomas Engellenner, and Lana Gladstein are registered
`practitioners. Thus, in each case a Motion for Admission pro hac vice is not proper
`under these circumstances. Patent Owner has already filed a Power of Attorney
`designating Reza Mollaaghababa, Thomas Engellenner, and Lana Gladstein as
`counsel in the corresponding proceedings. IPR2013-00593, Paper No. 11,
`IPR2013-00594, Paper No. 9, IPR2013-00597, Paper No. 8, IPR2013-00598,
`Paper No. 10.
`In a separate e-mail to the Board, which Patent Owner’s lead counsel
`Theodosios Thomas, states was copied to opposing counsel, Patent Owner
`requested authorization to file a motion to withdraw back-up counsel, Stephen J.
`Tytran, from further representation in each inter partes review. We note that Mr.
`Tytran is not designated on the only Power of Attorney filed by Patent Owner in
`each inter partes review. If Mr. Tytran is not already counsel of record in each
`subject patent, Mr. Tytran is not authorized to act on behalf of Patent Owner and
`was not properly designated as back-up counsel. 37 C.F. R. 42.10(b). If Mr.
`Tytran is designated counsel of record, he is authorized to file a motion to
`withdraw. 37C.F.R. § 42.10(e). Withdrawal should be in accordance with the
`provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 11.116.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00593; -00594;-00597;-00598
`Patent 8,045,952; 8,050,652; 8,230,099; 8,214,873
`
`
`In consideration of the above, it is
`ORDERED that the Motions seeking admission pro hac vice for Reza
`Mollaaghababa, Thomas Engellenner, and Lana Gladstein are DENIED;
`FURTHER ORDERED that any appropriate Motion to Withdraw by
`Stephen Tytran under 37 C.F.R. 11.116 be filed not later than January 3, 2014;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner file a proper power of attorney
`and back-up counsel designation not later than January 3, 2014.
`
`
`PETITIONER: (via electronic transmission)
`David L. Fehrman
`dfehrman@mofo.com
`
`
`
`Mehran Arjomand
`marjomand@mofo.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER: (via electronic transmission)
`
`Theodosios Thomas, Reg. No. 45,159
`ted.thomas@sceneralabs.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
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
