UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Attorney Docket No. AKBM-33544
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`AKER BIOMARINE AS
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`NEPTUNE TECHNOLOGIES AND BIORESSOURCES INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00003
`Patent 8,278,351 B1
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR THE PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`MICHAEL W. DE VRIES and LESLIE M. SCHMIDT
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`

`
`I.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and Petitioner Aker BioMarine AS (“AKBM”)
`
`respectfully move the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (“Board”) for the pro hac vice admission of
`
`Michael W. De Vries and Leslie M. Schmidt in this proceeding.
`
`II.
`
`GOVERNING LAW, RULES, AND PRECEDENT
`
`The Board is authorized to recognize counsel pro hac vice pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.10(c), which provides that:
`
`The Board 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 and to any other conditions as the Board may impose. For example,
`where the lead counsel is a registered practitioner, a motion to appear pro hac vice
`by counsel who is not a registered practitioner may be granted upon showing that
`counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established familiarity
`with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`In this proceeding, the Board has permitted the filing of motions for pro hac vice
`
`admission in accordance with the Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice in IPR2013-
`
`00010. (Paper 7 at 2.) In that order, the Board stated that a motion for admission pro hac vice
`
`should include a “statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize
`
`counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding” and “[b]e accompanied by an affidavit or
`
`declaration of the individual seeking to appear attesting to the following
`
`i. Membership in good standing of the Bar of at least one State or the District of
`Columbia; ii. No suspensions or disbarments from practice before any court or
`administrative body; iii. No application for admission to practice before any court
`or administrative body ever denied; iv. No sanctions or contempt citations
`imposed by any court or administrative body; v. The individual seeking to appear
`has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the
`Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of the C.F.R.; vi. The
`individual will be subject to the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility set
`forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. §
`11.19(a); vii. All other proceedings before the Office for which the individual has
`applied to appear pro hac vice in the last three (3) years; and viii. Familiarity with
`the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`Motorola Mobility LLC v. Arnouse, IPR 2013-00010 (MPT) (Paper 6 at 3-4).
`
`III.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`Based on the following facts, supported by their respective declarations, AKBM requests
`
`that Mr. De Vries and Ms. Schmidt be admitted pro hac vice in this proceeding. As an initial
`
`matter, AKBM’s lead and back-up counsel, J. Mitchell Jones (No. 44,174) and Amanda J. Hollis
`
`(No. 55,629) are registered practitioners.
`
`A. Mr. De Vries Meets The Requirements For Admission Pro Hac Vice
`
`1.
`
`Mr. De Vries has nearly fourteen years of experience as a litigation attorney who
`
`specializes in patent litigation, representing clients in patent litigation matters in various United
`
`States District Courts, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and before the International
`
`Trade Commission.
`
`2.
`
`Mr. De Vries is very familiar with U.S. Patent No. 8,278,351, and with the legal subject
`
`matter, technical subject matter, and prior art discussed in Petitioner’s Request for Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,278,351, which forms the basis for this proceeding.
`
`3.
`
`Mr. De Vries is a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of California. He is
`
`admitted to practice before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the
`
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, the United States District
`
`Court for the Northern District of California, the United States District Court for the Central
`
`District of California, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, the
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the United States Court of Appeals
`
`for the Eleventh Circuit.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`4.
`
`Mr. De Vries has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`5.
`
`Mr. De Vries has never had a court or administrative body deny my application for
`
`admission to practice.
`
`6.
`
`Mr. De Vries has never been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`7.
`
`Mr. De Vries has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and
`
`the Board's Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of the C.F.R.
`
`8.
`
`Mr. De Vries agrees to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Code
`
`of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`9.
`
`In the past three (3) years, Mr. De Vries was admitted pro hac vice as counsel for Oracle
`
`Corporation before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a Post-Grant Review Petition
`
`concerning Method and Apparatus For A Cryptographically-Assisted Commercial Network
`
`System Designed to Facilitate and Support Expert-Based Commerce, CBM No. 2013-00015
`
`B. Ms. Schmidt Meets The Requirements For Admission Pro Hac Vice
`
`1.
`
`Ms. Schmidt has nearly six years of experience as a litigation attorney who specializes in
`
`patent litigation, representing clients in patent litigation matters in various United States District
`
`Courts, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and before the International Trade
`
`Commission.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`2.
`
`Ms. Schmidt is very familiar with U.S. Patent No. 8,278,351, and with the legal subject
`
`matter, technical subject matter, and prior art discussed in Petitioner’s Request for Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,278,351, which forms the basis for this proceeding. She was
`
`counsel for AKBM in the ITC investigation and district court actions related to this patent and
`
`was involved with factual and technical developments in that matter.
`
`3.
`
`Ms. Schmidt is a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of New York, the Bar
`
`of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the Bar of the District of Columbia. She is admitted
`
`to practice before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, the United
`
`States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the United States Court of Appeals for the
`
`Seventh Circuit.
`
`4.
`
`Ms. Schmidt has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`5.
`
`Ms. Schmidt has never had a court or administrative body deny my application for
`
`admission to practice.
`
`6.
`
`Ms. Schmidt has never been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`7.
`
`Ms. Schmidt has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the
`
`Board's Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of the C.F.R.
`
`8.
`
`Ms. Schmidt agrees to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Code
`
`of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 10.20 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`9.
`
`In the past three (3) years, Ms. Schmidt has not appeared pro hac vice in any proceedings
`
`before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
`
`IV. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF MR. DE
`VRIES AND MS. SCHMIDT IN THIS PROCEEDING
`
`The Board 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 and any other
`
`conditions the Board may impose. 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). AKBM’s lead counsel, J. Mitchell
`
`Jones, and back-up counsel, Amanda J. Hollis, are registered practitioners before the Board.
`
`Based on the facts contained herein, good cause exists to admit Mr. De Vries and Ms. Schmidt
`
`pro hac vice.
`
`Mr. De Vries has approximately 14 years of patent litigation experience. Mr. De Vries
`
`has represented clients in matters related to the chemical arts, among others, and has significant
`
`experience in patent litigation matters. Since the institution of the inter partes review
`
`proceedings, Mr. De Vries has led the education of Kirkland & Ellis LLP attorneys regarding
`
`these proceedings and has been admitted pro hac vice in CBM No. 2013-00015, filed April 2,
`
`2013. In addition, since the institution of this proceeding, Mr. De Vries has been involved in
`
`strategy and fact development. In view of Mr. De Vries’ extensive patent litigation and his
`
`knowledge of the subject matter of this proceeding, AKBM has a substantial need for Mr. De
`
`Vries’ pro hac vice admission and his involvement in the continued prosecution of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`Ms. Schmidt is an experienced litigator with approximately 6 years of patent litigation
`
`experience. Ms. Schmidt has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this
`
`proceeding, as she represented AKBM in the International Trade Commission Investigation and
`
`district court proceedings related to U.S. Patent No. 8,278,351 (“the ’351 patent”), the patent
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`subject to this review. Specifically, Ms. Schmidt was counsel for AKBM in Certain Omega-3
`
`Extracts from Marine or Aquatic Biomass and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-
`
`877; Neptune Technologies & Bioressources, Inc. v. Aker BioMarine ASA, No. 11-cv-894-GMS
`
`(D. Del.); Neptune Technologies & Bioressources, Inc. v. Aker BioMarine ASA, No. 12-cv-1252-
`
`GMS (D. Del.); Neptune Technologies & Bioressources, Inc. v. Aker BioMarine AS, No. 13-cv-
`
`340-GMS (D. Del.). Ms. Schmidt was actively involved with the factual and technical
`
`investigation concerning the ’351 patent. In view of Ms. Schmidt’s extensive knowledge of the
`
`subject matter of this proceeding, and in view of the interrelatedness of this proceeding and the
`
`ITC investigation and district court proceedings, AKBM has a substantial need for Ms.
`
`Schmidt’s pro hac vice admission and her involvement in the continued prosecution of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`
`V.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petition respectfully requests that Michael W. De Vries and
`
`Leslie M. Schmidt be admitted pro hac vice.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /John Mitchell Jones/
`J. Mitchell Jones, Ph.D.
`jmjones@casimirjones.com
`Reg. No. 44,174
`CASIMIR JONES SC
`2275 Deming Way, St. 310
`Middleton, WI 53562
`Tel: (608) 662-1277
`Fax: (608) 662-1276
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`Amanda J. Hollis
`amanda.hollis@kirkland.com
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`300 N. LaSalle St.
`Chicago, IL 60654
`Tel: (312) 862-2011
`Fax: (312) 862-2200
`Back-up Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`Date: May 9, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(b) that a complete copy of
`
`this Motion for the Pro Hac Vice Admission of Michael W. De Vries, P.C. and Leslie M.
`
`Schmidt and accompanying declarations by Michael W. De Vries and Leslie M. Schmidt are
`
`being served electronically via e-mail (as consented to by the Patent Owner), on May 9, 2014,
`
`the same day as the filing of the above-identified documents in the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office (USPTO), upon:
`
`
`Stephen L. Altieri, Ph.D.
`saltieri@cooley.com
`zpatdcdocketing@cooley.com
`Cooley LLP
`Attn: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Ste. 700
`Washington, D.C.
`Tel: (617) 937-2371
`Fax: (202) 842-7899
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`J. Dean Farmer, Ph.D.
`dfarmer@cooley.com
`zpatdcdocketing@cooley.com
`Cooley LLP
`Attn: Patent Group
`1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Ste. 700
`Washington, D.C.
`Tel: (617) 937-2370
`Fax: (202) 842-7899
`Back-up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`/John Mitchell Jones/
`J. Mitchell Jones, Ph.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8