Case No. IPR2014-00604
`Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`
`Filed on behalf of The Gillette Company
`By: Michael A. Diener, Reg. No. 37,122
`Larissa Park, Reg. No. 59,051
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`60 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109
`Tel: (617) 526-6000
`Email: Michael.Diener@wilmerhale.com
`Larissa.Park@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Patent Owner of
`U.S. Patent No. 6,896,775 to Roman Chistyakov
`
`IPR Trial No. IPR2014-00604
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF
`MARK MATUSCHAK
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`
`
`
`Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`
`Filed on behalf of The Gillette Company
`By: Michael A. Diener, Reg. No. 37,122
`Larissa Park, Reg. No. 59,051
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`60 State Street
`Boston, MA 02109
`Tel: (617) 526-6000
`Email: Michael.Diener@wilmerhale.com
`Larissa.Park@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Patent Owner of
`U.S. Patent No. 6,896,775 to Roman Chistyakov
`
`IPR Trial No. IPR2014-00604
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF
`MARK MATUSCHAK
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`I.
`
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and Paper No. 4 authorizing the parties to file motions
`
`for pro hac vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Petitioner The Gillette Company requests
`
`that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) admit Mark Matuschak pro hac vice in this
`
`proceeding, IPR2014-00604. Patent Owner Zond, LLC does not oppose.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts Showing Good Cause for the Board to Recognize Counsel Pro
`Hac Vice During the Proceeding
`
`In accordance with 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 and to any other conditions as the Board may impose. Section 42.10(c)
`
`indicates that “where 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 a showing that counsel is an
`
`experienced litigating attorney and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue
`
`in the proceeding.” The facts here establish good cause for the Board to recognize Cosmin
`
`Maier pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`1.
`
`Lead counsel, Michael Diener, is a registered practitioner. Backup counsel,
`
`Larissa Park, is also a registered practitioner.
`
`2.
`
`Counsel, Mark Matuschak, is an experienced litigator and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding. Accompanying this motion as
`
`Exhibit 1117 is the November 11, 2014 Declaration of Mark Matuschak in Support of this
`
`Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice (“Matuschak Decl.”). In his declaration, Mr. Matuschak
`
`states:
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the Commonwealth of
`
`Massachusetts and the Bar of the State of New York. I am admitted to practice
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, as well as the
`
`First, Second, Third and Sixth Circuits. I am also admitted to practice before the
`
`United States District Courts for the District of Massachusetts and Colorado. I
`
`have been admitted pro hac vice in many district courts including the Eastern and
`
`Northern Districts of Texas, the Northern and Central Districts of California, the
`
`District of Delaware, the Southern and Northern Districts of New York, the
`
`Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Southern and Northern Districts of Indiana,
`
`the Southern District of Ohio and the District of Utah.
`
`Matuschak Decl. ¶ 2 (Ex. 1117). Mr. Matuschak also states:
`
`I am familiar with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. I am counsel in
`
`Zond, LLC v. The Gillette Co. and The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:13-CV-
`
`11567-DJC (D. Mass.) (filed July 1, 2013), which is related to and involves the
`
`same patent at issue in this proceeding. ... I have represented The Procter &
`
`Gamble Company and/or The Gillette Company in multiple patent and trademark
`
`matters since 2008, including confidential patent-related analysis, and the
`
`following United States District Court cases: Georgia-Pacific Consumer
`
`Products LP v. The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:08-CV-3245 (N.D. Ga. 2008);
`
`The Procter & Gamble Co. v. Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP, No. 1:09-
`
`CV-=318 (S.D. Ohio 2009); The Gillette Co. and The Procter & Gamble Co. v.
`
`Sebron Co., No. 8:08-cv-00154 (C.D. Cal. 2008); Zond, Inc. v. The Gillette Co.
`
`and The Procter & Gamble Co., No. 1:13-cv-11567-JLT (D. Mass. 2013).
`
`Matuschak Decl. ¶¶ 10-11 (Ex. 1117).
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`3.
`
`The Board has recognized “that there is a need for [a party] to have its related
`
`litigation counsel involved” in the inter partes review process. LKQ Corp. v. ClearLamp, LLC,
`
`Case IPR2013-00020 (Dec. 5, 2012), Paper 13.
`
`4.
`
`In his declaration, Mr. Matuschak also attests to each of the listed items required
`
`by the “Order—Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in Case IPR2013--00639,
`
`Paper 7 and agrees to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. See Matuschak Decl. ¶¶ 1-12 (Ex.
`
`1117).
`
`5.
`
`Finally, this proceeding is just one of six parallel proceedings before this Board
`
`that involve the same Petitioners and Patent Owner, as well as the same lead and backup counsel.
`
`See Case Nos. IPR2014-00477, IPR2014-00479, IPR2014-00578, IPR2014-00580, and
`
`IPR2014-00726. Mr. Matuschak’s admission is necessary to enable him to assist lead and
`
`backup counsel with litigation-related tasks—e.g., taking depositions of Patent Owner’s
`
`experts—in these concurrent proceedings.
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`III. Conclusion
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board admit Mark
`
`Matuschak pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Michael A. Diener/
`
`Michael A. Diener
`Registration No. 37,122
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`HALE AND DORR LLP
`60 State Street
`Boson, MA 02109
`michael.diener@wilmerhale.com
`Tel.: 617-526-6000
`
`Dated: November 11, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on November 11, 2014, I caused a true and correct copy of the
`
`following materials:
`
` Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
` Exhibit 1117
`
` Petitioner’s List of Exhibits
`
`to be served via electronic mail on the following counsel of record for Patent Owner:
`
`Bruce Barker, Lead Counsel
`USPTO Reg. No. 33,291
`Chao Hadidi Stark & Barker LLP
`176 East Main Street, Suite 6
`Westborough, MA 01581
`bbarker@chsblaw.com
`Tel.: 508-366-3800
`
`Dr. Gregory J. Gonsalves, Backup Counsel
`USPTO Reg. No. 43,639
`2216 Beacon Lane
`Falls Church, Virginia
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`Tel.: 571-419-7252
`
`
`
`
`
`/Michael A. Diener/
`
`Michael A. Diener
`
`Registration No. 37,122
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-00604; Docket No.: 0110198-00193 US2
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mark Matuschak
`
`PETITIONER’S LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Description
`Chistyakov, U.S. Patent No. 6,896,775
`D.V. Mozgrin, et al, High-Current Low-Pressure Quasi-Stationary
`Discharge in a Magnetic Field: Experimental Research, Plasma Physics
`Reports, Vol. 21, No. 5, 1995
`A. A. Kudryavtsev, et al, Ionization relaxation in a plasma produced by a
`pulsed inert-gas discharge, Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys. 28(1), January 1983
`Lantsman, U.S. Pat. No. 6,190,512
`Certified translation of D.V. Mozgrin, High-Current Low-Pressure Quasi-
`Stationary Discharge in a Magnetic Field: Experimental Research, Thesis at
`Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, 1994 (“Mozgrin Thesis”)
`Mozgrin Thesis (Original Russian)
`Catalogue Entry at the Russian State Library for the Mozgrin Thesis
`Wang, U.S. Pat. No. 6,413,382
`Gopalraja, U.S. Pat. No. 6,277,249
`Bobbio, U.S. Pat. No. 5,045,166
`Declaration of Richard DeVito
`Thornton, J. and Hoffman, D.W. Stress related effects in thin films, Thin
`Sold Films, 171, 1989, 5-31.
`
`N. Savvides and B. Window, Unbalanced magnetron ion‐assisted
`
`deposition and property modification of thin films, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A
`4(3), 504-508, 1986
`Grove, T.C., Arcing problems encountered during sputter deposition of
`aluminum, White Papers, ed: Advanced Energy, 2000
`Sellers, J., Asymmetric bipolar pulsed DC: the enabling technology for
`reactive PVD, Surface & Coatings Technology, vol. 98, issue 1-3, January,
`1998.
`Rossnagel, S. M., & Hopwood, J., Magnetron sputter deposition with high
`levels of metal ionization. Applied Physics Letters, 63(24), 3285-3287,
`1993.
`Declaration of Mark Matuschak
`
`Exhibit
`1101
`
`1102
`
`1103
`1104
`
`1105
`1106
`1107
`1108
`1109
`1110
`1111
`
`1112
`
`1113
`
`1114
`
`1115
`
`1116
`1117
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 138024264v.2
`
`7
`
`
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
