`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
` Paper 25
`Entered: November 17, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`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 IPR2015-00657 (Patent 6,286,045 B1)
`Case IPR2015-00662 (Patent 6,014,698)1
`____________
`
`Before KARL D. EASTHOM, JUSTIN T. ARBES, and
`MIRIAM L. QUINN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARBES, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Matthias A. Kamber
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 Case IPR2015-00660 has been consolidated with Case IPR2015-00657,
`and Case IPR2015-00666 has been consolidated with Case IPR2015-00662.
`This Decision addresses an issue pertaining to both cases. Therefore, we
`exercise our discretion to issue a single Decision to be filed in each case.
`The parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00657 (Patent 6,286,045 B1)
`IPR2015-00662 (Patent 6,014,698)
`
`
`Petitioner filed a Motion requesting pro hac vice admission of
`
`Matthias A. Kamber in each of the instant proceedings, and provided an
`
`Affidavit from Mr. Kamber in support of each request. See IPR2015-00657,
`
`Paper 23, Ex. 1029; IPR2015-00662, Paper 21, Ex. 1029. Petitioner’s lead
`
`counsel, Michelle K. Holoubek, is a registered practitioner. Patent Owner
`
`did not file an opposition to either Motion. Based on the facts set forth in
`
`the Motions and Affidavits, we conclude that Petitioner has established good
`
`cause for Mr. Kamber’s pro hac vice admission. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c);
`
`Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-00639, slip op. at
`
`3–4 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (setting forth the requirements for pro
`
`hac vice admission). We note, however, that although the documents are
`
`each titled “Affidavit,” they are in the form of a declaration and lack the
`
`affirmation required by 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.68 and 42.2.
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Matthias A. Kamber are conditionally granted, and Mr. Kamber will be
`
`authorized to represent Petitioner as back-up counsel in the instant
`
`proceedings once Petitioner files, within one week of this Decision,
`
`a corrected Affidavit in each proceeding containing the same content as the
`
`original document and the required statements under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68, with
`
`no other changes;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in the instant proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Kamber 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
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00657 (Patent 6,286,045 B1)
`IPR2015-00662 (Patent 6,014,698)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Kamber is subject to the USPTO
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101–11.901 and
`
`the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00657 (Patent 6,286,045 B1)
`IPR2015-00662 (Patent 6,014,698)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Michelle K. Holoubek
`Michael V. Messinger
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`mholoubek-PTAB@skgf.com
`mikem-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Garland Stephens
`Justin Constant
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
`garland.stephens@weil.com
`justin.constant@weil.com
`
`
`
`
`4
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
