`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 10
`Entered: November 17, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`SIERRA WIRELESS AMERICA, INC., SIERRA WIRELESS, INC.,
`and RPX CORP.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`M2M SOLUTIONS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01823
`Patent 8,648,717 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, JUSTIN T. ARBES, and
`DANIEL J. GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GALLIGAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01823
`Patent 8,648,717 B2
`
`As authorized by the Notice of Filing Date Accorded to the Petition
`(Paper 6), Patent Owner M2M Solutions LLC filed a “Motion for Pro Hac
`Vice Admission” (Paper 9) of Michelle Moran.1 Petitioners do not oppose
`the Motion. Patent Owner’s Motion is granted. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c);
`see also Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Order
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission, Paper 7 (October 15,
`2003) (setting forth requirements for pro hac vice admission).2
`It is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission is
`granted, and Ms. Moran is authorized to represent Patent Owner as back-up
`counsel in IPR2015-01823;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in these inter partes review
`proceedings; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Moran is to comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as
`set forth in Title 37, Part 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and that Ms.
`
`
`1 Patent Owner also filed an affidavit of Ms. Moran in support of the Motion
`(Ex. 2001). Although Ms. Moran’s declaration identifies several
`proceedings before the Office in which she has applied to appear pro hac
`vice in the last three years (Ex. 2001 ¶ 9), we are aware that Ms. Moran has
`applied to be admitted before the Office in related proceedings IPR2015-
`01670 and IPR2015-01672, which were not identified. As those
`proceedings are related to this proceeding, we hold this omission as a minor
`typographical oversight and do not deny Ms. Moran admission based on this
`omission.
`2 Available at http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/appealing-
`patent-decisions/decisions-and-opinions/representative-orders.
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01823
`Patent 8,648,717 B2
`
`Moran is 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.
`
`3
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Jennifer Hayes
`jenhayes@nixonpeabody.com
`
`Robert Krebs
`rkrebs@nixonpeabody.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jeffrey Costakos
`jcostakos@foley.com
`
`Michelle Moran
`mmoran@foley.com