`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 10
`Entered: September 22, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION and
`ORACLE AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH
`INSTITUTE,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00976
`Patent 6,978,346
`____________
`
`
`Before MIRIAM. L. QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Benjamin A. Lasky
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00976
`Patent 6,978,346
`
`
`Petitioner filed a motion for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Benjamin
`
`A. Lasky. Paper 6 (“Motion”). Petitioner also filed an affidavit of Mr.
`Lasky in support of its Motion. Ex. 1009. Patent Owner has not filed an
`opposition to the Motion.
`Having reviewed the Motion and the affidavit of Mr. Lasky,
`Petitioner’s Motion is granted. Petitioner’s Motion has shown good cause,
`and the facts averred in the affidavit show that Mr. Lasky has sufficient
`qualifications to represent Petitioner in this proceeding. Further, Petitioner
`has shown a need for its counsel in the related district-court cases involved
`in this proceeding. See Unified Patents v. Parallel Iron, Case IPR2013-
`00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (setting forth the requirements for pro hac vice
`admission) (Paper 7). Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`Mr. Lasky will be permitted to appear pro hac vice in the instant
`proceeding as back-up counsel only.
`Order
`
`
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission of Mr.
`Benjamin A. Lasky in the instant proceeding is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Lasky is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Lasky 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 Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Lasky is subject to the USPTO Rules
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00976
`Patent 6,978,346
`
`
`of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`Todd M. Friedman (Lead Counsel)
`Gregory S. Arovas (Back-up Counsel)
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`IBM-Safe-Storage-KEService@kirkland.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Matthew C. Phillips (Lead Counsel)
`Derek Meeker (Back-up Counsel)
`Alexander C.D. Giza (Back-up Counsel)
`RENAISSANCE IP LAW GROUP LLP
`matthew.phillips@renaissanceiplaw.com
`derek.meeker@renaissanceiplaw.com
`agiza@raklaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`