`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, LLC
`Patent Owner
`___________
`
`Case IPR2014-00029
`Patent 6,771,290
`___________
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, and
`LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PETTIGREW, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`B.E. Technology’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Robert E. Freitas
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner respectfully requests the Board to recognize Robert E. Freitas
`
`as counsel pro hac vice during this proceeding.1 Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10 and
`
`in response to the authorization provided by the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in the Notice of
`
`Filing Date Accorded to Petition (Paper Number 4, entered October 8, 2013)
`
`(“Notice”), Patent Owner B.E. Technology, L.L.C. (“Patent Owner”) submits this
`
`motion for Mr. Freitas to appear pro hac vice.
`
`I.
`
`Time for Filing
`
`Pursuant to the “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”
`
`in Case IPR2013-006392 (“Order”), this motion for pro hac vice admission is being
`
`filed no sooner than twenty-one (21) days after service of the petition.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts
`
`Pursuant to the Order, the following statement of facts, supported by the
`
`attached Declaration of Mr. Freitas, shows that there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize Mr. Freitas pro hac vice.
`
`
`1 Corresponding motions for Pro Hac Vice admission are being concurrently filed in co-pending
`cases IPR2014-00031, IPR2014-00033, IPR2014-00038, IPR2014-00039, IPR2014-00040,
`IPR2014-00044, IPR2014-00052, and IPR2014-00053.
`
` Patent Owner notes that while the Notice references the “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro
`Hac Vice Admission” in Case IPR2013-00010 (MPT), the Order in Case IPR2013-00639 states
`that the Final Rule regarding Changes to Representation of Others Before the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office removes part 10 of title 37, C.F.R. referred to in the Order in Case
`IPR2013-00010 (MPT). Accordingly, for purpose of this proceeding, Patent Owner will refer to
`the Order in Case IPR2013-00639.
`
` 2
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`
`Lead counsel for this proceeding, Jason S. Angell, is a registered practitioner
`
`(Reg. No. 51408).
`
`Mr. Freitas is an experienced litigation attorney, and has served as counsel in
`
`numerous patent infringement cases in various district courts and the International
`
`Trade Commission. Mr. Freitas has not been suspended or disbarred from practice,
`
`and he has not had any application for admission to practice denied, or had any
`
`sanctions or contempt citations imposed against him. Mr. Freitas is an active
`
`member in good standing of the California Bar and is admitted to practice before
`
`the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Courts of Appeals for
`
`the Federal Circuit, Fifth Circuit, Ninth Circuit, and Tenth Circuit, various United
`
`States district courts and the United States Court of Federal Claims. His mailing
`
`address is Freitas Angell & Weinberg LLP, 350 Marine Parkway, Suite 200,
`
`Redwood Shores, California 94065, his email address is rfreitas@fawlaw.com, and
`
`his direct dial telephone number is (650) 730-5527.
`
`Mr. Freitas is lead counsel for Patent Owner in B.E. Technology, L.L.C. v.
`
`Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., No. 2:12-cv-02827, co-pending
`
`litigation in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.
`
`That litigation involves U.S. Patent No. 6,771,290 (“’290 Patent”), the patent at
`
`issue in this proceeding. In his role as counsel in the co-pending litigation, Mr.
`
`Freitas has reviewed and is familiar with the ’290 Patent, the asserted prior art
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`references, and the invalidity claim charts. Further, Mr. Freitas is familiar with the
`
`factual and legal matters at issue in that case, including the claim construction
`
`issues likely to be presented in the co-pending litigation. Mr. Freitas has thus
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Freitas has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules for Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of the
`
`C.F.R., and he agrees to be subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct
`
`set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 11.19(a). Mr. Freitas has not applied pro hac vice in any other proceeding before
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office in the last three years.
`
`Patent Owner has expended significant resources in the co-pending litigation
`
`with Mr. Freitas as lead counsel, and Patent Owner wishes Mr. Freitas to represent
`
`it in this proceeding.
`
`III. Affidavit or Declaration of Individual Seeking to Appear
`
`This motion for pro hac vice admission is accompanied by a Declaration of
`
`Mr. Freitas as required by the Order.
`
`IV. Conclusion
`
`The facts contained in the Statement of Facts above, and contained in the
`
`Declaration of Mr. Freitas, establish that there is good cause to admit Mr. Freitas
`
`pro hac vice in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Jason S. Angell
`Jason S. Angell
`Reg. No. 51408
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: May 12, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF ROBERT E. FREITAS IN SUPPORT OF
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.68, I, Robert E. Freitas, hereby attest to the
`
`following:
`
`1. My mailing address is Freitas Angell & Weinberg LLP, 350 Marine
`
`Parkway, Suite 200, Redwood Shores, California 94065, my email address is
`
`rfreitas@fawlaw.com, and my telephone number is (650) 730-5527.
`
`2.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the California Bar (admitted in
`
`1978), as well as the following federal courts:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`k.
`
`Supreme Court of the United States
`
`California Supreme Court
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
`
`U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
`
`U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
`
`U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
`
`U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
`
`U.S. District Court of the District of Colorado
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`
`
`l.
`
`3.
`
`U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee;
`
`I have not been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court
`
`or administrative body;
`
`4.
`
`I have never had an application for admission to practice before any
`
`court or administrative body denied;
`
`5.
`
`I have never had sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court
`
`or administrative body against me;
`
`6.
`
`I have 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 37 C.F.R.;
`
`7.
`
`I will be subject to the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility
`
`set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 11.19(a);
`
`8.
`
`I have not applied to appear pro hac vice before the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office in any other proceeding in the last three years; and
`
`9.
`
`I graduated from law school in 1977. I spent one year as a law clerk
`
`to Justice Ralph M. Holman of the Oregon Supreme Court, and I have been
`
`engaged full time in private law practice since October 1978. I am an experienced
`
`litigation attorney and have served as counsel in numerous patent infringement
`
`cases in various district courts and the International Trade Commission.
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`
`
`10.
`
`I am lead counsel for Patent Owner in a co-pending litigation (B.E.
`
`Technology, L.L.C. v. Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., No. 2:12-cv-
`
`02827) in which U.S. Patent No. 6,771,290 is asserted against Petitioner. I have
`
`reviewed and am familiar with the asserted patent, prior art references, claim
`
`construction issues, and invalidity contentions in the co-pending litigation.
`
`Accordingly, I am familiar with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
`
`America that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`Executed on May 12, 2014
`
`/s/ Robert E. Freitas
`Robert E. Freitas
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`It is certified that copies of B.E. Technology’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission of Robert E. Freitas Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10 and the Declaration
`
`of Robert E. Freitas In Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission have been
`
`served on Petitioner as provided in 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e) via electronic mail
`
`transmission addressed to the persons at the address below:
`
`John Flock
`Paul Qualey
`KENYON & KENYON, LLP
`jflock@kenyon.com
`pqualey@kenyon.com
`SonyBETech@kenyon.com
`
`Date: May 12, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Jason S. Angell
`Jason S. Angell
`Reg. No. 51408
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`-9-