Paper No. 42
` Filed: March 14, 2016
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS VI LLC,
`
`PETITIONER,
`
`V.
`
`CELGENE CORPORATION,
`
`PATENT OWNER
`
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2015-01092
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,045,501
`___________________
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF SADAF R. ABDULLAH AS BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Filed: March 14, 2016
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`
`COALITION FOR AFFORDABLE DRUGS VI LLC,
`
`PETITIONER,
`
`V.
`
`CELGENE CORPORATION,
`
`PATENT OWNER
`
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2015-01092
`
`
`
`Patent No. 6,045,501
`___________________
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF SADAF R. ABDULLAH AS BACK-UP COUNSEL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Petitioner Coalition for Affordable Drugs
`
`VI LLC (“CFAD”) hereby respectfully requests that the Board grant admission pro
`
`hac vice to Ms. Sadaf R. Abdullah to act as back-up counsel in this proceeding.
`
`I.
`
`Introduction and Background
`
`Counsel for CFAD consulted with counsel for Patent Owner, Celgene
`
`Corporation (“Celgene”), and Celgene agreed it would not oppose the present
`
`motion for pro hac vice admission of Ms. Abdullah.
`
`On October 27, 2015, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”)
`
`instituted inter partes review of Celgene’s U.S. Patent No. 6,315,720. (See Paper
`
`22.) The Board had previously authorized the parties to file motions for pro hac
`
`vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). (See Paper 3 at 2.) Therefore, the
`
`present motion is proper at this time.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts Showing Good Cause for the Present Motion
`
`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.”
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`As explained and attested to in the accompanying Declaration of Sadaf R.
`
`Abdullah, Ms. Abdullah has an established familiarity of the subject matter at issue
`
`in this inter partes review. (Ex. 1063 ¶¶ 10-14.) Ms. Abdullah is an experienced
`
`patent litigation attorney with specific experience serving as counsel (including as
`
`trial counsel) in cases related to pharmaceutical patents. (Ex. 1063 ¶¶ 9.) As a
`
`result of her work in those cases, Ms. Abdullah has gained expertise with regard to
`
`inventions in the field of pharmaceuticals.
`
`Ms. Abdullah is a Member in good standing with the Massachusetts (2006),
`
`New York (2010), and Texas (2014) State Bars and is also admitted to practice in
`
`the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (Id. ¶ 1.)
`
`Ms. Abdullah has applied to appear pro hac vice before the Office in one
`
`other proceeding within the last three years. (Id. ¶ 2.) On February 19, 2016, Ms.
`
`Abdullah applied to appear pro hac vice in IPR2015-00988, and that application
`
`was granted on March 1, 2016 (see IPR2015-00988, Paper 26). (Ex. 1063 ¶ 2.)
`
`Concurrently with this motion, Petitioner is also filing motions for pro hac vice
`
`admission for Ms. Abdullah in IPR2015-01096, IPR2015-01102, and IPR2015-
`
`01103.
`
`Ms. Abdullah has never been disbarred or suspended from practice before
`
`any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 3.)
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Ms. Abdullah has never had any sanctions or contempt citations imposed on
`
`him from any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 4.)
`
`Ms. Abdullah has never been denied any application for admission to practice
`
`before any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 5.)
`
`CFAD’s lead counsel for this proceeding, Ms. Sarah Spires, is a registered
`
`patent practitioner. (Id. ¶ 8.) She is expected to take a maternity leave in the next
`
`several months (id.), and CFAD seeks the admission of Ms. Abdullah as back-up
`
`counsel in order to assist during her absence.
`
`Ms. Abdullah has established deep familiarity with the specific subject matter
`
`at issue in this proceeding. (Id. ¶¶ 10-14.) Ms. Abdullah has read and analyzed the
`
`Petition and supporting materials, and has read and analyzed U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,045,501 (’501 Patent) as well as its prosecution history. (Id. ¶¶ 11-12.) Ms.
`
`Abdullah worked with the expert witness (Jeffrey Fudin) in preparation for his
`
`deposition regarding his declaration in support of the Petition, and attended the
`
`deposition. (Id. ¶ 14). For example, she has previously worked as counsel in a case
`
`concerning Patent Owner’s REMS-related programs, which is the subject matter of
`
`’501 patent.
`
`Finally, Ms. Abdullah has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42 et. seq., and has agreed to be subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. 11.101 et. seq., and disciplinary jurisdiction
`
`under 37 C.F.R. 11.19(a). (Id. ¶ 7.)
`
`III. Statement of Relief Requested
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`grant admission pro hac vice to Ms. Abdullah as back-up counsel.
`
`
`
`Dated: March 14, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`/Sarah E. Spires/
`Sarah E. Spires (Reg. No. 61,501)
`SKIERMONT DERBY LLP
`2200 Ross Ave. Ste. 4800W
`Dallas, TX 75201
`P: 214-978-6600/F: 214-978-6601
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), I certify that I caused to be served on the
`
`counsel for Patent Owner a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petitioner’s
`
`Unopposed Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Sadaf R. Abdullah as Back-Up
`
`Counsel, as well as Exhibit 1063 to the Motion: Declaration of Sadaf R. Abdullah
`
`in Support of Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion For Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`
`Sadaf R. Abdullah as Back-Up Counsel, by electronic means on March 14, 2016 at
`
`the following address of record:
`
`Francis Cerrito
`nickcerrito@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Eric C. Stops
`ericstops@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Frank C. Calvosa
`frankcalvosa@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Anthony Insogna
`aminsogna@jonesday.com
`
`J. Patrick Elsevier
`jpelsevier@jonesday.com
`
`Gasper J. LaRosa
`gjlarosa@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Dated: March 14, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Sarah E. Spires/
`Sarah E. Spires (Reg. No. 61,501)
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
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
