`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`______________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________________
`
`
`GOOGLE INC.,
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`AT HOME BONDHOLDERS’ LIQUIDATING TRUST
`
`Patent Owner
`
`______________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-00658
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,286,045
`______________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF AUDREY MANESS PURSUANT TO 37 § C.F.R. 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
` RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
` Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10, and as authorized in the Board’s Notice of
`
`Filing Date Accorded to Petition (Paper 3) (“Authorizing Order”), entered on
`
`February 24, 2015, Patent Owner At Home Bondholders’ Liquidating Trust
`
`requests that the Board admit Audrey Maness pro hac vice in this proceeding
`
`involving U.S. Patent No. 6,286,045 (“the ’045 patent”).
`
`Petitioner Google Inc. also filed four related petitions on the same day,
`
`February 2, 2015: two involving the same ’045 patent (IPR2015-00657 and
`
`IPR2015-00660), and another two involving U.S. Patent No. 6,014,698 (“the ’698
`
`patent”), which is a continuation-in-part of the ’045 patent, (IPR2015-00662 and
`
`IPR2015-00666). Patent Owner has asserted both the ’045 patent and the ’698
`
`patent against Petitioner Google in a pending district court litigation in the
`
`Northern District of California, Richard A. Williamson, On Behalf of and as
`
`Trustee for At Home Bondholders’ Liquidating Trust v. Google Inc., No. 3:15-cv-
`
`00966-JD.
`
`II. GOVERNING LAW, RULES AND PRECEDENT
`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 and to any other conditions as the Board may
`impose. For example, where the lead counsel is a registered
`practitioner, a motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel who is not a
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`
`
`registered practitioner may be granted upon showing that counsel is an
`experienced litigating attorney and has an established familiarity with
`the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). The Authorizing Order requires that any motion for pro hac
`
`vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) must be filed in accordance with the
`
`“Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” entered in Case
`
`IPR2013-00639 (Authorizing Order at 2).
`
`The Order in Case IPR2013-00639 requires that a Motion for pro hac vice
`
`Admission contain (1) “a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the
`
`Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding”; and (2) “an
`
`affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to appear attesting to the
`
`following”:
`
`i. Membership in good standing of the Bar of at least one State or the
`
`District of Columbia;
`
`ii. No suspensions or disbarments from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body;
`
`iii. No application for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body ever denied;
`
`iv. No sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court or
`
`administrative body;
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`v. The individual seeking to appear has 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.;
`
`vi. The individual will 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);
`
`vii. All other proceedings before the Office for which the individual has
`
`applied to appear pro hac vice in the last three (3) years; and
`
`viii. Familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
`The facts, supported by the attached Declaration of Audrey Maness in
`
`Support of Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice (“Maness Decl.”), establish good cause
`
`to admit Ms. Maness pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`1. Audrey Maness is an experienced litigating attorney. Ms. Maness has
`
`been an attorney for more than eight years. (Maness Decl. ¶ 1.) In particular, Ms.
`
`Maness has been litigating patent cases for approximately seven of those years.
`
`(Id.)
`
`2. Lead counsel Garland Stephens is a registered practitioner (Reg. No.
`
`37,242). (Id. ¶2.) Back-up counsel Justin Constant is a registered practitioner
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`
`(Reg. 66,884). (Id.) With respect to this proceeding, Ms. Maness will work closely
`
`with the lead and back-up counsel. (Id.)
`
`3. Ms. Maness is a member in good standing of the Texas State Bar,
`
`with no suspensions or disbarments from practice, nor any application for
`
`admission to practice denied, nor any sanctions or contempt citations, and is
`
`admitted to practice in the United States Courts of Appeals for the Fifth, Eighth,
`
`and Federal Circuits, and the United States District Courts for the Northern and
`
`Eastern Districts of Texas. (Id. ¶¶ 3-6.)
`
`4. Ms. Maness is familiar with the subject matter at issue in this
`
`proceeding based on his work as lead counsel in the pending district court case
`
`Richard A. Williamson, On Behalf of and as Trustee for At Home Bondholders’
`
`Liquidating Trust v. Google Inc., No. 3:15-cv-00966-JD (N.D. Cal. March 3,
`
`2015), which involves the same patent at issue in this proceeding. (Id. ¶7.)
`
`5. Ms. Maness has been actively involved in all aspects of the pending
`
`district court case, which was originally filed in the District of Delaware (Case No.
`
`1:14-cv-00216-GMS) on February 19, 2014 before getting transferred to the
`
`Northern District of California on March 2, 2015, including the issue of validity of
`
`the patents-in-suit that include the patent at issue in this proceeding. (Id. ¶8.)
`
`Patent Owner also asserted the related ’698 patent in this case. In view of her legal
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`
`experience and familiarity with the issues in the present matter, Patent Owner has
`
`requested her services in this proceeding. Denial of her appearance in this case
`
`would create an undue burden for the Patent Owner. (Id.)
`
`6. Ms. Maness has 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. (Id. ¶9.)
`
`7. Ms. Maness also agrees to be subject to the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office 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). (Id. ¶10.)
`
`8. Ms. Maness has not applied to appear pro hac vice before this office
`
`before.
`
`9. Petitioner Google has indicated that it will not oppose this Motion.
`
`IV. ANALYSIS
`The facts, contained in the Statement of Facts above and in the attached
`
`Maness Declaration, establish that there is good cause to admit Ms. Maness pro
`
`hac vice in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. §42.10. Lead counsel is a registered
`
`practitioner, Ms. Maness is an experienced litigation attorney, and Ms. Maness has
`
`an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`admit Audrey Maness pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
` Dated: June 26, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Garland T. Stephens
`Garland T. Stephens Reg. No. 37,242
`Justin L. Constant Reg. No. 66,883
`700 Louisiana, Suite 1700
`Houston, TX 77002
`(713) 546-5011
`(713) 224-9511
`garland.stephens@weil.com
`justin.constant@weil.com
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00658
`Patent Owner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Audrey Maness
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on June 26, 2015, a copy of PATENT OWNER’S
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF AUDREY MANESS was
`
`served by filing this document through the Patent Review Processing System as
`
`well as delivering a copy via electronic mail to counsel of record for Petitioner
`
`Google Inc. at the following addresses:
`
`Michelle K. Holoubek (Reg. No. 54,179)
`mholoubek-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`Michael V. Messinger (Reg. No. 37,575)
`Mikem-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`1100 New York Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Justin L. Constant
`
`Justin L. Constant
`
`Reg. No. 66883
`
`7
`
`