`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 29
`Entered: October 23, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC and
`LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`Patent Owners.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00596
`Patent 7,802,310 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JONI Y. CHANG Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Apple’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Michael D. Jay
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00596
`Patent 7,802,310 B2
`
` Petitioner, Apple Inc. (“Apple”), filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Michael D. Jay. Paper 27 (“Mot.”). The Motion is unopposed.
`Mot. 2. For the reasons provided below, Apple’s Motion is granted.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we may recognize counsel pro hac vice
`during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause, subject to the condition that
`lead counsel be a registered practitioner. The Order authorizing motions for pro
`hac vice admission requires a statement of facts showing there is good cause for us
`to recognize counsel pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual
`seeking to appear in the instant proceeding. Paper 7, 2.
`In the instant proceeding, lead counsel for Apple, Mr. David K.S. Cornwell,
`is a registered practitioner. Paper 3, 2. Apple’s Motion indicates that there is good
`cause for us to recognize Mr. Jay pro hac vice during this proceeding, and is
`supported by the declaration of Mr. Jay (Ex. 1036). Mot. 5–7.
`In particular, Mr. Jay declares that he is an experienced patent litigating
`attorney and has been involved in at least twenty patent infringement actions
`involving a variety of technologies. Ex. 1036 ¶ 4. Mr. Jay also declares that he
`has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the instant
`proceeding, as he has been representing Apple in the related district court
`proceeding that involves the same patent being challenged in the instant
`proceeding. Id. ¶¶ 10–13. Additionally, Mr. Jay’s declaration complies with the
`requirements set forth in the Board’s order authorizing motions for pro hac vice
`admission. Id. ¶¶ 4–13.
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Jay has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Apple in the instant proceeding. We further recognize
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00596
`Patent 7,802,310 B2
`
`that there is a need for Apple to have its counsel in the co-pending litigation
`involved in the instant proceeding. Accordingly, Apple has established that there
`is good cause for Mr. Jay’s admission.
`It is
`ORDERED that Apple’s motion for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Michael
`D. Jay is granted; Mr. Jay is authorized to represent Apple as back-up counsel in
`the instant proceeding only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Apple is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Jay 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. Jay is to be 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
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00596
`Patent 7,802,310 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`David K.S. Cornwell
`Mark W. Rygiel
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`davidc-PTAB@skgf.com
`mrygiel-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joseph A. Rhoa
`Updeep S. Gill
`NIXON & VANDERHYE P.C.
`jar@nixonvan.com
`usg@nixonvan.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
