UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`HTC CORPORATION and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent 7,777,753
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S
`AMENDED UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`OF JUSTIN CHEN UNDER 37 C.F.R.§ 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`HTC CORPORATION and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent 7,777,753
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S
`AMENDED UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`OF JUSTIN CHEN UNDER 37 C.F.R.§ 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I. STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s “Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and
`
`Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary Response,” dated July 8, 2015 (Paper
`
`No. 3), authorizing the parties to file motions for pro hac vice admission under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owner Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC,
`
`respectfully requests that the Board allow Justin Chen to appear pro hac vice on its
`
`behalf in this proceeding. Petitioner consents to this motion.
`
`II. REASONS THE REQUESTED RELIEF SHOULD BE GRANTED
`
`As set forth in the Statement of Material Facts below, and as required by 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owner has demonstrated good cause to admit Mr. Chen
`
`pro hac vice in this proceeding. In particular, Patent Owner’s lead counsel is a
`
`registered practitioner, and Mr. Chen is an experienced litigating attorney having an
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Furthermore, this motion is being filed more than twenty one days after
`
`service of the petition; includes a statement of facts showing good cause for the
`
`Board to recognize Mr. Chen pro hac vice; and is being filed concurrently with
`
`Exhibit 2014, the Amended Declaration of Justin Chen in Support of Patent
`
`Owner’s Amended Unopposed Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Justin Chen
`
`Under 37 C.F.R.§ 42.10(c) (“Chen Decl.”), all in accordance with the “Order
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in Unified Patents, Inc. v.
`
`Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 at 3 (P.T.A. B. Oct. 15, 2013).
`
`III. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS
`
`1.
`
` 37 C.F. R. § 42.10(c) provides that “[t]he 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 the issue in the proceeding.”
`
`2. Masood Anjom, lead counsel for Patent Owner Parthenon Unified
`
`Memory Architecture LLC in this proceeding, is a registered practitioner
`
`holding Registration No. 62,167.
`
`3.
`
`As set forth in the Chen Decl., Mr. Chen is an experienced litigating
`
`attorney, and has been invoiced in numerous litigations involving patent
`
`infringement in District Courts across the country. He has experience in
`
`Markman hearings in patent infringement matters. Mr. Chen’s biography is
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit 2014.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,777,753 (“the ‘753 Patent”) is currently asserted
`
`4.
`
`against Petitioners HTC Corporation and HTC America, Inc. in co-pending
`
`litigations in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas:
`
`Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Huawei Techs. Co., Ltd. et
`
`al., No. 2:14-cv-00687-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed June 12, 2014; Parthenon
`
`Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Motorola Mobility, Inc., No. 2:14-cv-
`
`00689-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed June 12, 2014; Parthenon Unified
`
`Memory Architecture LLC v. HTC Corp. et al., No. 2:14-cv-00690-RSP
`
`(E.D. Tex.) filed June 12, 2014; Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture
`
`LLC v. LG Elecs., Inc. et al., No. 2:14-cv-00691-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed
`
`June 12, 2014; Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Samsung
`
`Elecs. Co., Ltd. et al., No. 2:14-cv-00902-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed
`
`September 22, 2014; Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v.
`
`Qualcomm Inc. et al., No. 2:14-cv-00930-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed
`
`October 1, 2014; Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. ZTE Corp.
`
`et al., No. 2:15-cv-00225-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex.) filed February 17, 2015;
`
`Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Apple, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-
`
`00621-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex) filed May 1, 2015; and Parthenon Unified
`
`Memory Architecture LLC v. LG Electronics Mobilcomm USA, Inc., No.
`
`2:15-cv-1950 (E.D. Tex) filed November 30, 2015. Mr. Chen is counsel for
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture, LLC in the co-pending litigation
`
`and, as such, has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in
`
`this proceeding. In the co-pending litigation Mr. Chen argued the Markman
`
`hearings, reviewed prior art references and claim charts for invalidity
`
`contentions, and was heavily involved in forming claim construction
`
`positions and drafting claim construction briefs, all of which are relied upon
`
`in the petition requesting inter parties review of U.S. Patent No. 7,777,753.
`
`Patent Owner has expended significant financial resources in the co-pending
`
`litigations with Mr. Chen as counsel, and Patent Owner wishes to continue
`
`using Mr. Chen as counsel in this proceeding. Additionally, Mr. Chen has
`
`thoroughly reviewed the Petition and accompanying Exhibits submitted in
`
`this proceeding. (Id.).
`
`5. Mr. Chen has attested to each of the requirements set forth in
`
`paragraph 2(b)(i)-(viii) of the “Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission” in Case IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 at 3. (Chen Decl., ¶¶ 2-9)
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`
`
`
`In view of the foregoing, Patent Owner respectfully submits that the
`
`requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) have been satisfied, and requests an Order
`
`permitting Justin Chen to appear pro hac vice on its behalf in this proceeding.
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`By: /s/ Masood Anjom
`
`Masood Anjom
`
`Reg. No. 62,167
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`Parthenon Unified Memory
`Architecture, LLC
`
`
`
`Dated: August 31, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AHMAD, ZAVITSANOS, ANAIPAKOS,
`ALAVI &MENSING, P.C.
`1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2500
`Houston, TX 77010
`Telephone: 713-655-1101
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01501
`Patent No. 7,777,753
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that Patent Owner’s Amended Unopposed Motion for Pro
`
`Hac Vice Admission of Justin Chen Under 37 C.F.R.§ 42.10(c) was served on
`August 31, 2016, by electronic mail to the following:
`Lead Counsel for HTC Corporation
`Back-up Counsel for HTC Corporation
`Stephen M. Everett
`Joseph A. Micallef
`Reg. No. 30,050
`Reg. No. 39,772
`Sidley Austin LLP
`Sidley Austin LLP
`555 California Street, Suite 2000
`1501 K Street, N.W.
`San Francisco, CA 94104
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (415) 772-7482
`Tel: (202) 736-8492
`Email: Stephen.everett@sidley.com
`Email: jmicallef@sidley.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 31, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Masood Anjom
`
`Masood Anjom
`
`Reg. No. 62,167
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`Parthenon Unified Memory
`Architecture, LLC
`AHMAD, ZAVITSANOS, ANAIPAKOS,
`ALAVI &MENSING, P.C.
`1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2500
`Houston, TX 77010
`Telephone: 713-655-1101
`
`7
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
