`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`
`
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS II LLC
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`NPS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-00990
`Patent No. 7,056,886
`_____________________
`
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF
`BRENT E. ROUTMAN UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), and in accordance with the Board’s “Order –
`
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in case IPR2013-00639,
`
`Petitioner Coalition for Affordable Drugs II LLC, requests that the Board admit
`
`Brent E. Routman pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`GOVERNING LAWS, RULES, AND PRECEDENT
`
`Section 42.10(c) provides 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 any other conditions as the Board may
`
`impose.” The Rule provides that a motion relating to counsel who is not a
`
`recognized 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 Board’s April 24, 2015 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition,
`
`Paper No. 6, authorized the parties to file motions for pro hac vice admission under
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). The Notice provided pro hac vice motions shall be filed in
`
`accordance with the “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in
`
`Case IPR2013-00639. On October 15, 2013, the Board issued an Order, Paper No.
`
`7, in Case IPR2013-00639 that provides the guidelines for admission under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c). The Order incorporated changes in the rules, including the
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`publication of the Final Rule in 78 Fed. Reg. 20180 adopting new Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct.
`
`The October 15, 2013 Order provides that motions for pro hac vice must
`
`“[c]ontain a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding.” The Order further provides
`
`the motion is to be “accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the individual
`
`seeing 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;
`
`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.;
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`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.”
`
`TIME OF FILING
`
`In accordance with the rules, this motion is being filed no sooner than
`
`twenty one (21) days after service of the petition.
`
`STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
`
`The following facts, supported by the attached Declaration of Brent E.
`
`Routman in Support of Petitioner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice, establish
`
`good cause to recognize Mr. Routman pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Petitioner’s lead counsel, Jeffrey D. Blake, is a registered practitioner (Reg.
`
`No. 58,884).
`
`Counsel Brent E. Routman is an experienced litigating attorney. Mr.
`
`Routman is a partner at the law firm of Merchant & Gould P.C. Mr. Routman has
`
`been involved in patent law for more than nineteen (19) years. Routman Decl., ¶ 8.
`
`His experience includes representing a wide range of clients in intellectual property
`
`litigation.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`Mr. Routman has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in
`
`this proceeding. Mr. Routman has worked with lead counsel in all aspects of
`
`preparing Petitioner’s Petition, the expert declaration filed in support of the
`
`Petition, and all other filings Petitioner has made. Id., ¶ 9. As such, Mr. Routman
`
`has become familiar with U.S. Patent No. 7,056,886 (“the ’886 Patent”) and with
`
`its prosecution file history. Id. He is familiar with the prior art relied upon in
`
`Petitioner’s Petition. He is also familiar with the legal and factual arguments made
`
`by Petitioner and Patent Owner. Id.
`
`Mr. Routman is in good standing and admitted to practice in Minnesota and
`
`the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Routman Decl., ¶ 1.
`
`Mr. Routman has had no suspensions or disbarments from practice before
`
`any court or administrative body. Id., ¶ 2.
`
`Mr. Routman has never been denied application to practice before any court
`
`or administrative body. Id., ¶ 3.
`
`Mr. Routman has never been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court
`
`or administrative body. Id., ¶ 4.
`
`Mr. Routman 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., ¶ 5.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`Mr. Routman has agreed to be subject to the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office Rules of Professional Conduct, as set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§
`
`11.101 et. seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a). Id., ¶ 6.
`
`Mr. Routman has not previously applied for admission pro hac vice in
`
`proceedings before the Office. However, Mr. Routman is applying concurrently to
`
`appear pro hac vice before the Office in proceeding No. IPR2015-01018, No.
`
`IPR2015-01093, No. IPR2015-01169 and No. IPR2015-01076. ¶ 7.
`
`ANALYSIS
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) states that 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 “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in
`
`Case IPR2013-00639 clarified the requirements for a motion for pro hac vice
`
`admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`The above-identified facts and the Routman Declaration establish that there
`
`is good cause to admit Mr. Routman pro hac vice in this proceeding under 37
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00990
`Patent 7,056,886
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Lead counsel, Jeffrey D. Blake, is a registered practitioner. Mr.
`
`Routman is an attorney with over nineteen (19) years of patent experience. Mr.
`
`Routman has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the
`
`proceeding. Admission of Mr. Routman will further enable Petitioner to be
`
`effectively and efficiently represented before the Board in this proceeding. Mr.
`
`Routman, in turn, will ensure that he follows the rules and guidelines set out by the
`
`Board.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the reasons stated above, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`admit Brent E. Routman to appear pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
` Respectfully submitted,
` MERCHANT & GOULD, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 20, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(Trial No. IPR2015-00990)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Jeffrey D. Blake/
` Jeffrey D. Blake, Esq.
` Registration No. 58,884
` MERCHANT & GOULD P.C.
` 191 Peachtree Street N.E.
` Suite 4300
` Atlanta, GA 30303
` jblake@merchantgould.com
`
` ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER
`
`
`
`6