`
`
`
`
`
`
`Entered: November 23, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________________
`
`PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`INO THERAPEUTICS LLC,
`Patent Owner
`_______________________
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904 B2
`_______________________
`
`Before KEN B. BARRETT, MICHAEL J. FITZPATRICK, AND
`SCOTT A. DANIELS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER INO THERAPEUTICS LLC’S MOTION FOR
`PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF DAVID K. CALLAHAN
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`I.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and the Notice of Filing Date Accorded to
`
`Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary Response (Paper No. 3),
`
`Patent Owner INO Therapeutics LLC (“Patent Owner”) respectfully requests the
`
`pro hac vice admission of attorney David K. Callahan, Esq. in this proceeding.
`
`Patent Owner has conferred with counsel for Praxair Distribution, Inc.
`
`(“Petitioner”), and Petitioner does not oppose this motion.
`
`II. LEGAL STANDARD
`Under 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 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.
`
`The Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent
`
`Owner Preliminary Response (Paper No. 3) further instructs:
`
`The parties are advised that under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), recognition of
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`
`counsel pro hac vice requires a showing of good cause. The parties
`
`are authorized to file motions for pro hac vice admission under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Such motions shall be filed in accordance with the
`
`“Order -- Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in Case
`
`IPR2013-00639, Paper 7, a copy of which is available on the Board
`
`Web site under “Representative Orders, Decisions, and Notices.”
`
`(Id. at 2.) The above referenced “Order - - Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission” further provides:
`
`A motion for pro hac vice admission must:
`
`a.
`
`Contain a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board
`
`to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding.
`
`b.
`
`Be accompanied by 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
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`
`administrative body;
`
`v.
`
`The individual seeking to appear has read and will comply with
`
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and 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 (3) years; and
`
`viii.
`
`Familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`(IPR2013-00639, Paper No. 7 at 3.) As set forth below, and in the accompanying
`
`Declaration of David K. Callahan (“Callahan Decl.”), attached as Exhibit 2004,
`
`each of these requirements is satisfied here.
`
`III. STATEMENT OF FACTS SHOWING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE
`BOARD TO RECOGNIZE DAVID K. CALLAHAN PRO HAC VICE
`IN THIS PROCEEDING
`
`Mr. Callahan is a member in good standing of the Illinois State Bar (Bar No.
`
`6206671) and the District of Columbia Bar (Bar No. 494657). He is also admitted
`
`to practice before the U.S. District Courts for the District of Colorado, Eastern
`
`District of Michigan, Eastern District of Texas, Northern District of California,
`
`Northern District of Illinois (General and Trial Bars), Southern District of Indiana,
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`and Western District of Wisconsin, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fourth,
`
`Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and Federal Circuits, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
`
`(Callahan Decl. at ¶ 2.) Mr. Callahan has never been suspended or disbarred from
`
`practice before any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 3.) No application of Mr.
`
`Callahan for admission to practice before any court or administrative body has ever
`
`been denied. (Id.) Nor has any court or administrative body imposed sanctions or
`
`contempt citations against Mr. Callahan. (Id.) Mr. Callahan has read, fully
`
`understands, 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 the C.F.R. (Id. ¶ 4.) Mr.
`
`Callahan acknowledges and agrees that he 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). (Id.)
`
`Patent Owner’s lead counsel in this proceeding, Robert Steinberg, is a
`
`registered practitioner (Reg. No. 33144). Moreover, as set forth below (and in his
`
`accompanying declaration), Mr. Callahan is both an experienced and technically-
`
`trained litigation attorney with an established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Callahan received an A.B. in Political Science with honors from the
`
`University of Chicago in 1987 and a law degree from the University of Michigan
`
`Law School in 1991. (Id. ¶ 5.) After graduating law school, Mr. Callahan joined
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`Kirkland & Ellis LLP and was elected into the partnership in October 1997. He
`
`joined Latham & Watkins LLP in April 2014. (Id.)
`
`Mr. Callahan is currently a member of Latham & Watkins’ intellectual
`
`property group, with a focus on complex litigation in the areas of patent,
`
`trademark, trade secret, false advertising, and unfair competition. (Id. ¶ 6.) Mr.
`
`Callahan has over twenty years of experience litigating intellectual property
`
`matters. (Id.)
`
`Mr. Callahan has been actively involved in analyzing and assisting with
`
`Patent Owner’s Response to the Petition for Inter Partes Review submitted in this
`
`proceeding, as well as the responses to the petitions submitted in related
`
`proceedings that are currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board:
`
`• Case No. IPR2015-00529: Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,846,112;
`
`• Case No. IPR2015-00888: Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,776,794;
`
`• Case No. IPR2015-00889: Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,573,209;
`
`• Case No. IPR2015-00891: Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 8,573,210; and
`
`• Case No. IPR2015-00893: Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`
`Patent No. 8,776,795.
`
`(Id. ¶ 7.) He has applied for and been granted pro hac vice admission in Case No.
`
`IPR2015-00529. (Id. ¶ 8.) Mr. Callahan is concurrently applying to appear pro
`
`hac vice in the following proceedings: Case Nos. IPR2015-00888, IPR2015-
`
`00889, IPR2015-00891, and IPR2015-00893. (Id.)
`
`In view of Mr. Callahan’s extensive knowledge of the subject matter at issue
`
`in this proceeding, Patent Owner has a substantial need for Mr. Callahan’s pro hac
`
`vice admission and his involvement in the continued prosecution of this
`
`proceeding.
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner respectfully requests that Mr.
`
`Callahan be admitted pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /Robert Steinberg/
`
`Robert Steinberg (Reg. No. 33,144)
`bob.steinberg@lw.com
`Latham & Watkins LLP
`355 South Grand Avenue
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
`213.485.1234; 213.891.8763 (Fax)
`
`Daniel G. Brown (Reg. No. 54,005)
`daniel.brown@lw.com
`Latham & Watkins LLP
`885 Third Avenue
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: November 23, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`
`
`
`New York, NY 10022-4834
`212.906.1200; 212.751.4864 (Fax)
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00884
`U.S. Patent No. 8,291,904
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), I certify that on this 23rd day of
`
`November, 2015, true and correct copies of the foregoing Patent Owner INO
`
`Therapeutics LLC’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of David K.
`
`Callahan Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and Exhibit Thereto were served by
`
`electronic mail on Petitioner’s lead and backup counsel at the following email
`
`addresses:
`
`sanjay.murthy@klgates.com
`
`sara.kerrane@klgates.com
`
`michael.abernathy@klgates.com
`
`margaux.nair@klgates.com
`
`maria.doukas@klgates.com
`
`Praxair-Ikaria@klgates.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /Robert Steinberg/
`
`Robert Steinberg (Reg. No. 33,144)
`bob.steinberg@lw.com
`Latham & Watkins LLP
`355 South Grand Avenue
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
`213.485.1234; 213.891.8763 (Fax)