`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 18
`Date: October 8, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA, LLC,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`APLIX IP HOLDINGS CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner
`
`Cases1
`IPR2015-00729 (Patent 7,280,097 B2)
`IPR2015-00730 (Patent 7,932,892 B2)
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, BRYAN F. MOORE and JASON J. CHUNG,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Patent Owner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Jason Bartlett
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the listed cases. We exercise our discretion to
`issue one Order to be docketed in each case. The parties, however, are not
`authorized to use this caption for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00729 (Patent 7,280,097 B2)
`IPR2015-00730 (Patent 7,932,892 B2)
`
`
`On April 15, 2015, Patent Owner filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Bartlett (Papers 152) and an accompanying affidavit in
`support thereof (Ex. 2006). Petitioner did not file an opposition to these
`motions. Accordingly, we admit Mr. Bartlett only as backup counsel.3
`In consideration of the forgoing, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s unopposed motion for pro hac vice
`admission of Mr. Bartlett is GRANTED; Mr. Bartlett is authorized to
`represent Patent Owner only as back-up counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bartlett is to comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as
`set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bartlett is 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.
`
`
`2 For expediency, IPR2015-00730 is representative, and all subsequent
`citations are to IPR2015-00730 unless otherwise noted.
`3 We note the “declaration” is procedurally defective since it does not
`comply with PTO rules. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1 and 1.68. In addition, the
`motion does not explain how or why Patent Owner needs Mr. Bartlett and
`neither the motion nor Mr. Bartlett identifies what kind of experience
`(litigation or technical) Mr. Bartlett has. Despite these deficiencies, we
`exercise our discretion and grant the motion. In any future motions for pro
`hac vice, the parties must provide a proper declaration in compliance with
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.1 and 1.68 and the motion for pro hac vice must identify the
`kind of experience (litigation or technical) of the counsel requesting
`admission.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-00729 (Patent 7,280,097 B2)
`IPR2015-00730 (Patent 7,932,892 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Eric A. Buresh
`Abran J. Kean
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`eric.buresh@eriseip.com
`abran.kean@eriseip.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Michael Mauriel
`Robert Gilbertson
`Sybil Dunlop
`Sherman Kahn
`MAURIEL KAPOUYTIAN WOODS LLP
`mmauriel@mkwllp.com
`BGilbertson@GreeneEspel.com
`SDunlop@greeneespel.com
`skahn@mkwllp.com
`
`
`
`3