`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 20
`Entered: March 15, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`HTC CORPORATION,
`HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., and
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JAMES B. ARPIN, MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, and
`SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motions for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Michael McBride and Mr. Amir Alavi
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues pertaining to all three cases. Therefore, we exercise
`our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not
`authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)
`
`
`Having considered Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Amir Alavi (Paper 18), Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Michael McBride (Paper 19), and the Affidavits of
`Mr. Alavi (Ex. 2002) and of Mr. McBride (Ex. 2003)2 filed in support, it is:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s unopposed motions for pro hac vice
`admission of Messrs. Alavi and McBride are granted; Messrs. Alavi and McBride
`are authorized to represent Patent Owner only as back-up counsel in the instant
`proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the instant proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Messrs. Alavi and McBride are 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 Messrs. Alavi and McBride are 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 We understand paragraph 7 of Mr. Alavi’s Affidavit and of Mr. McBride’s
`Affidavit to indicate that Messrs. Alavi and McBride will be subject to the USPTO
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 11.101 et. seq., which
`replaced the “USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`10.20 et seq.” (Ex. 2002 ¶ 7; Ex. 2003 ¶ 7) effective May 3, 2013, and we
`encourage Patent Owner to refer to the correct rules in its next pro hac vice
`motion.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01500 (Patent 7,321,368 B2)
`IPR2015-01501 (Patent 7,777,753 B2)
`IPR2015-01502 (Patent 7,542,045 B2)
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Allan M. Soobert
`Naveen Modi
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`Samsung-PUMA-IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`Rajeev Gupta
`Darren M. Jiron
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`LGE_Finnegan_PUMAIPR@finnegan.com
`
`Joseph A. Micallef
`Stephen M. Everett
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`stephen.everett@sidley.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Masood Anjom
`Scott Clark
`AHMAD, ZAVITSANOS, ANAIPAKOS, ALAVI & MENSING P.C.
`manjom@azalaw.com
`sclark@azalaw.com
`
`
`
`
`3