`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`COMARCO WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-01879
`Patent 8,492,933
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF BRETT J. WILLIAMSON IN SUPPORT
`OF PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2015-01879
`
`I, Brett J. Williamson, declare as follows:
`
`
`
`1.
`
`I am a Partner with the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP. I
`
`represent and advise Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Apple”) in connection with the
`
`above-captioned inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding and I am lead counsel in
`
`the underlying district court litigation (Comarco Wireless Technologies, Inc. v. Apple
`
`Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-00145-AG-DFM (C.D. Cal.)) on the patent at issue in
`
`this IPR, U.S. Patent No. 8,492,933 (“’933 Patent”).
`
`2.
`
`I have been a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of
`
`California since 1989. My California State Bar number is 145235. I have been
`
`a member in good standing of the Bar of the District of Columbia since
`
`February 2015. My D.C. Bar number is 1024759. I am also admitted to
`
`practice before numerous federal courts:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`
`
`U.S.D.C. for the Northern District of California (since 1993);
`
`U.S.D.C. for the Eastern District of California (since 1993);
`
`U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of California (since 1993);
`
`U.S.D.C. for the Central District of California (since 1989);
`
`U.S.D.C. for the District of Colorado (since 1999)
`
`U.S.C.A. for the Second Circuit (since 2014);
`
`U.S.C.A. for the Ninth Circuit (since 1989);
`
`U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit (since 2002); and
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2015-01879
`
`i.
`
`U.S. Supreme Court (since 1995).
`
`I have over 25 years of experience practicing patent and technology
`
`related litigation. I have litigated numerous patent cases across the country,
`
`including in Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District
`
`of Columbia, Illinois, Nevada, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Virginia, and litigated
`
`many of them through both trial and appeal. A copy of my biography is
`
`provided as Appendix A.
`
`4.
`
`I am familiar with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. I have
`
`supervised and been actively involved in the present IPR proceeding regarding
`
`the ’933 Patent. I represent Petitioner in concurrent litigation involving the
`
`’933 Patent, and I have extensively reviewed the patent, its file history, the
`
`Patent Owner’s preliminary infringement contentions served in the litigation,
`
`and the prior art being asserted in the petition for IPR in this proceeding. I
`
`have gained significant familiarity with the implicit claim construction issues in
`
`the underlying litigation, including the Patent Owner’s claimed claim scope as
`
`disclosed in its infringement contentions. These issues significantly overlap
`
`with the corresponding issues in this IPR proceeding.
`
`5. Moreover, I have advised Petitioner on strategy regarding Petitioner’s
`
`affirmative arguments in this IPR proceeding, supervised the drafting of the
`
`petition, reviewed the accompanying Declaration of Dr. Nathaniel Davis IV,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and worked with Petitioner to find and identify the references relied upon in
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2015-01879
`
`the petition and to draft other submissions to the Office.
`
`6.
`
`The prior art references at issue in the IPR proceedings are also at issue
`
`in the underlying litigation. I have reviewed both that art and a vast amount of
`
`additional, related prior art — all of which were disclosed in invalidity
`
`contentions that I participated in preparing and signed.
`
`7.
`
`I have represented clients in connection with many patent litigations
`
`regarding technology similar to that at issue in this IPR, which relates generally
`
`to mobile devices and electrical signals.
`
`8.
`
`I have worked closely with Dr. Davis, who provided a declaration in this
`
`IPR, regarding his declaration. I was also involved in identifying and retaining
`
`Dr. Davis as an expert in this IPR, and I signed his engagement letter.
`
`9.
`
`I frequently publish on issues concerning patent law and technology
`
`related litigation.
`
`10.
`
`I have not been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court
`
`or administrative body. I have never had an application for admission to
`
`practice before any court or administrative body denied. No sanction or
`
`contempt citation has been imposed against me by any court or administrative
`
`body.
`
`11.
`
`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 part 42 of 37 C.F.R.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12.
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2015-01879
`
`I agree to and 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.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`13.
`
`I have not applied to appear pro hac vice before the Office in any other
`
`proceeding in the last three years.
`
`14.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein 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 Title 18 of the United States
`
`Code and that such willful false statements may jeopardize the validity of the
`
`application or any patents issued thereon.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Brett J. Williamson
`Brett J. Williamson
`O’Melveny & Myers LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: 9/30/2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`