UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01432
`Patent 7,139,794 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF EVAN S. DAY IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITIONER MICROSOFT CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR PRO HAC
`VICE ADMISSION UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01432
`Patent 7,139,794 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF EVAN S. DAY IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITIONER MICROSOFT CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR PRO HAC
`VICE ADMISSION UNDER 37 C.F.R. §42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2015-01432
`Affidavit of Evan S. Day
`
`
`
`I, Evan S. Day, being duly sworn and upon oath, hereby apply to appear pro
`
`hac vice before the Office in inter partes review proceeding under PTAB Case No.
`
`IPR2015-01432 on U.S. Patent No. 7,139,794 B2 and hereby attest to the
`
`following:
`
`1.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the state Bar of California and the
`
`United States District Court, Southern District of California. I am an
`
`associate member of the Virginia State Bar.
`
`2.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court
`
`or administrative body.
`
`3.
`
`I have never had an application for admission to practice before any court
`
`or administrative body denied.
`
`4.
`
`No sanction or contempt citation has been imposed against me by any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`5.
`
`I have 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. Part 42.
`
`6.
`
`I 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.P.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`1
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2015-01432
`Affidavit of Evan S. Day
`
`7.
`
`I have applied, and have been admitted by the Office, to appear pro hac
`
`vice before the Office in the last three (3) years. I have applied to appear
`
`before the PTAB in the following PTAB proceedings:
`
`i. HTC Corporation et al. v. Advanced Audio Devices, LLC
`Cases:
`IPR2014-01154 (Patent 6,587,403 B1)
`
`IPR2014-01155 (Patent 7,289,393 B2)
`
`IPR2014-01156 (Patent 7,817,502 B2)
`
`IPR2014-01157 (Patent 7,933,171 B2)
`
`IPR2014-01158 (Patent 8,400,888 B2)
`
`8.
`
`I am an experienced litigation attorney with more than 4 years of
`
`experience representing clients in patent cases involving computer
`
`hardware and software, Internet and e-commerce, hand held computers
`
`and other mobile devices, optics, displays, user interfaces, mapping
`
`services, audio applications, image processing, and digital graphics. I
`
`regularly litigate patent cases in various forums including various federal
`
`district courts and the International Trade Commission. I also regularly
`
`assist patent attorneys within Perkins Coie with post-grant procedures
`
`pending before the USPTO which relate to litigation that I am involved
`
`in, including the previous IPR trials listed above and the PTAB
`
`proceeding for which I am currently applying for admission pro hac vice.
`
`Through my experience in patent litigation matters, I have represented
`
`2
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2015-01432
`Affidavit of Evan S. Day
`
`clients in many phases of litigation including discovery, Markman
`
`hearings, and trial. My biography is attached hereto as Appendix A.
`
`9.
`
`On January 9, 2015, Patent Owner filed a lawsuit alleging that Petitioner
`
`Microsoft Corporation infringes several patents, including U.S. Patent
`
`No. 7,139,794, in Bradium Techs. LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 1:15-cv-
`
`00031-RGA, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
`
`That litigation is ongoing and led to inter partes review proceeding under
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2015-01432.
`
`10.
`
` I am counsel for Petitioner Microsoft Corporation in the above litigation
`
`in which I handle all phases of the litigation from discovery through trial,
`
`and will continue to be involved in the case as counsel. I am familiar
`
`with the technology and issued claims in the '794 Patent in the above
`
`litigation. I am familiar with the prior art references cited in PTAB Case
`
`No. IPR2015-01432 and the associated invalidity grounds before the
`
`PTAB.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2015-01432
`Affidavit of Evan S. Day
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made of my own knowledge are true and
`
`that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true. I further
`
`declare that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under Section 1001 of the Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/Evan S. Day/
`Evan S. Day
`Perkins Coie LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`
`
`
`Dated: July 8, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`Professional Biography
`
`|
`EVAN S. DAY ASSOCIATE
`
`SAN DIEGO
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA
`+1.858.720.5700
`EDay@perkinscoie.com
`
`Evan Day is an associate with the firm's Patent Litigation practice. Evan practices in the areas of patent litigation,
`Section 337 investigations, post-grant procedures, and due diligence investigations. Evan has represented clients in
`litigation matters spanning a wide variety of technologies, including optics, displays, user interfaces, mapping services,
`audio applications, image processing, and digital graphics.
`
`Evan previously served as an attorney on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps, where he served primarily as a
`prosecutor. He tried complex felony-level court-martial cases before both judges and juries, involving a wide range of
`offenses including rape, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, larceny, fraud, and narcotics manufacturing and distribution.
`
`PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION
`
`Awarded American Bar Association "Award for Professional Merit" for graduating first in class at the Naval Justice
`School in Newport, RI, 2009
`
`RELATED EMPLOYMENT
`
`U.S. Marine Corps, Judge Advocate, 2008 - 2011
`
`Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Rockville, MD, Intellectual Property
`Paralegal, 2007 - 2008
`
`Hamilton, Brook, Smith and Reynolds, P.C., Concord, MA, Summer Associate, 2006
`
`AREAS OF FOCUS
`
`PRACTICES
`Litigation
`Patent Litigation
`ITC Litigation
`Post-Grant Overview
`
`BAR AND COURT ADMISSIONS
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
`
`
`
`California
`U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
`
`EDUCATION
`
`Georgetown Law, J.D., 2007
`Harvard University, B.A., Biology, cum laude , 2003
`
`© 2016 Perkins Coie LLP
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`Microsoft Corp. Exhibit 1016
`Microsoft Corp. v. Bradium Tech., IPR2015-01432
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
