`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 21
`Entered: December 9, 2014
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________________
`
`
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY, TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR
`MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LTD., TSMC NORTH AMERICA
`CORPORATION, FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITED, and FUJITSU
`SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`________________________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00580, IPR2014-007261
`Patent 6,896,773 B2
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`
`Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Tigran Vardanian
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses the same issues in the inter partes reviews listed
`herein. Therefore, we issue one Decision to be filed in both of the cases.
`The parties, however, are not authorized to use this style of filing in
`subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00580, IPR2014-00726
`Patent 6,896,773 B2
`
`
`Patent Owner Zond, LLC (hereafter “Zond”) filed Motions for Pro
`
`Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Tigran Vardanian in both of the proceedings
`
`identified above. Paper 24 (“Mot.”).2 Zond indicates that these Motions
`
`were being filed without opposition. Mot. 1. For the reasons provided
`
`below, Zond’s Motions are 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 proceedings
`
`identified in the Appendix.
`
`In the proceedings at issue, lead counsel for Zond, Dr. Gregory J.
`
`Gonsalves, is a registered practitioner. Mot. 2. Zond’s Motions indicate that
`
`there is good cause for us to recognize Mr. Tigran Vardanian pro hac vice
`
`during these proceedings, and each is supported by a Declaration (Ex. 2002).
`
`Mot. 2–3.
`
`Mr. Vardanian declares that he is an experienced patent litigation
`
`attorney and has been practicing law, with a focus on patent litigation and
`
`other intellectual property matters. Ex. 2002 ¶ viii. Mr. Vardanian also
`
`declares that he has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in
`
`
`
`2 For the purpose of clarity and expediency, we treat IPR2014-00580 as
`representative, and all citations are to IPR2014-00580 unless otherwise
`noted.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00580, IPR2014-00726
`Patent 6,896,773 B2
`
`
`the proceedings identified in the Appendix, as he has been representing
`
`Zond in the related district court litigation that involves the same patents
`
`being challenged in the proceedings before us. Id. ¶ ix. Additionally, Mr.
`
`Vardanian’s Declaration complies with the requirements set forth in the
`
`Board’s Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission. Id. ¶¶ i–ix.
`
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Vardanian has sufficient legal
`
`and technical qualifications to represent Zond in the proceedings identified
`
`in the Appendix. We further recognize that there is a need for Zond to have
`
`its counsel in the co-pending litigation involved in the proceedings before
`
`us. Accordingly, Zond has established that there is good cause for Mr.
`
`Vardanian’s admission.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, it is
`
`ORDERED that Zond’s motions for pro hac vice admission of Mr.
`
`Vardanian for the instant proceeding are granted; Mr. Vardanian is
`
`authorized to represent Patent Owner as back-up counsel in the instant
`
`proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Vardanian is to comply with the
`
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for
`
`Trials, as set forth in Title 37, Part 42 of the C.F.R., and 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; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in the instant proceedings.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00580, IPR2014-00726
`Patent 6,896,773 B2
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Gregory J. Gonsalves
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`Bruce J. Barker
`CHAO HADIDI STARK & BARKER LLP
`bbarker@chsblaw.com
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Gillette:
`
`Michael A. Diener
`Andrej Barbic
`WILMER, CUTLER, PICKERING, HALE AND DORR, LLP
`michael.diener@wilmerhale.com
`andrej.barbic@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`TSMC and Fujitsu:
`
`David M O’Dell
`David L. McCombs
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`david.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`4
`
`