`571-272-7822
`
` Paper No. 19
`
`Entered: May 28, 2014
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00044 (Patent 6,771,290 B1)
`____________
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, and
`LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00044 (Patent 6,771,290 B1)
`
`On May 12, 2014, Patent Owner, B.E. Technology, LLC (hereinafter “Patent
`Owner” or “B.E. Technology”), filed a motion for pro hac vice admission of Mr.
`Robert E. Freitas. IPR2014-00044, Paper 17. The motion is unopposed.1 For the
`reasons provided below, B.E. Technology’s motion is granted.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), 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. In authorizing motions for pro hac
`vice admission, the Board requires the moving party to provide a statement of facts
`showing good cause for the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice and an
`affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to appear in this proceeding.
`Paper 3, Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition, 3 (incorporating requirements
`in the “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in IPR2013-
`00010).
`In the above-identified proceeding, lead counsel for B.E. Technology, Mr.
`Jason Angell, is a registered practitioner. B.E. Technology’s motion indicates that
`there is good cause for the Board to recognize Mr. Freitas pro hac vice during this
`proceeding, and is supported by the declaration of Mr. Freitas. Paper 17.
`In particular, Mr. Freitas declares that he is an experienced litigation
`attorney and has served as counsel in numerous patent infringement cases in
`various district courts and the International Trade Commission. Declaration, ¶ 9. 2
`
`
`1 Petitioner, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., did not file an opposition within
`one week from the filing of B.E. Technology’s motion.
`2 The Declaration should have been filed as an exhibit and not as a motion
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00044 (Patent 6,771,290 B1)
`
`Mr. Freitas is also counsel for B.E. Technology in a co-pending litigation, B.E.
`Technology, L.L.C. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 2:12-cv-02825,
`which involves U.S. Patent No. 6,771,290. Id., ¶ 10.
`Further, Mr. Freitas has reviewed and is familiar with the asserted patent,
`prior art references, claim construction issues, and invalidity contentions in the co-
`pending litigation. The motion and declaration comply with the requirements set
`forth in the Notice, as well as the updated requirements set forth in the Board’s
`order authorizing pro hac vice admission.
`Upon consideration, Patent Owner has demonstrated that Mr. Freitas
`possesses sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Patent Owner in
`this proceeding, and the Board recognizes that there is a need for Patent Owner to
`have related litigation counsel involved. Accordingly, Patent Owner has
`established good cause for Mr. Freitas’s admission. Mr. Freitas will be permitted to
`appear pro hac vice in this proceeding as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.10(c).
`For the foregoing reasons, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion for pro hac vice admission of Mr.
`Robert E. Freitas for this proceeding is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Freitas is authorized to represent Patent
`Owner as back-up counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent Patent Owner as lead counsel for this proceeding; and
`
`
`attachment. 37 C.F.R. § 42.63(a).
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00044 (Patent 6,771,290 B1)
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Freitas 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 to be subject to the Office’s
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a) and the USPTO Rules of
`Professional Conduct3 set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`3 Mr. Freitas incorrectly refers to this title as the “USPTO Code of Professional
`Responsibility.” Declaration, ¶ 7.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00044 (Patent 6,771,290 B1)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Barry Schindler
`Heath Briggs
`Greenberg Traurig, LLP
`SchindlerB@gtlaw.com
`BriggsH@gtlaw.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jason S. Angell
`Robert E. Freitas
`Freitas Tseng & Kaufman LLP
`jangell@ftklaw.com
`rfreitas@ftklaw.com
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
