`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In Support of the Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No.
`8,713,476
`
`In re Application of: Mathieu Kennedy
`Martyn
`
`Case No.: IPR2015-01985
`
`Filed: October 25, 2013
`
`Issued: April 29, 2014
`
`Assignee: Core Wireless Licensing
`S.a.r.l.
`
`Title: COMPUTING DEVICE WITH
`IMPROVED USER INTERFACE
`FOR APPLICATIONS
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION
`FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF NICHOLAS A. BROWN UNDER 37
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Certificate of Filing: I hereby certify that this Motion is being electronically filed with the USPTO on this 25th day
`of April, 2016.
`
`/Eric J. Maiers/
`By:
` Eric J. Maiers
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`I.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Petitioner LG Electronics, Inc. and LG
`
`Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A, Inc. (“LG”), by and through its attorneys,
`
`respectfully requests that the Board admit Nicholas A. Brown pro hac vice in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`II. GOVERNING LAW, RULES, AND PRECEDENT
`
`Section 42.10(c) states as follows:
`
`The 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 issue in the proceeding.
`
`Further, the Board requires that a motion for pro hac vice admission be filed
`
`in accordance with the “ORDER-AUTHORIZING MOTION FOR PRO HAC
`
`VICE ADMISSION – 37 C.F.R. §42.10” in Motorola Mobility LLC v. Patent of
`
`Michael Arnouse, Case No. IPR2013-00010 (“Representative Order”). The
`
`Representative Order states that the motion must “[c]ontain a statement of facts
`
`showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice during
`
`the proceeding,” and “[b]e accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the
`
`individual seeking to appear attesting to the following:”
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`i.
`
`Membership in good standing of the Bar of at least one
`
`State or the District of Columbia;
`
`ii.
`
`No suspensions or disbarments from practice before any
`
`court or administrative body;
`
`iii.
`
`No application for admission to practice before any court
`
`or administrative body ever denied;
`
`iv.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court
`
`or administrative body;
`
`v.
`
`The individual seeking to appear has 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 the C.F.R;
`
`vi.
`
`The individual will be subject to the USPTO Code of
`
`Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§
`
`10.20 et seq. 1 and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 11.19(a);
`
`
`1 The USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility in 37 C.F.R. § 10.20 et
`seq. was replaced by the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct in 37 C.F.R. §
`11.101 et seq., effective May 3, 2013.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`vii. All other proceedings before the Office for which the
`
`individual has applied to appear pro hac vice in the last
`
`three (3) years; and
`
`viii. Familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the
`
`proceeding.
`
`III.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`Based on the following statement of facts, and supported by the Declaration
`
`of Nicholas A. Brown submitted herewith as Exhibit 1007, LG submits that a
`
`showing of good cause has been made and respectfully requests the pro hac vice
`
`admission of Nicholas A. Brown in this proceeding:
`
`1.
`
`LG’s lead counsel, Herbert Finn, is a registered practitioner (Reg. No.
`
`38,139).
`
`2.
`
`LG’s backup counsel, Richard D. Harris, Reg. No. 27,898, Eric J.
`
`Maiers, Reg. No. 59,614, and Askhon Cyrus, Reg. No.69,832 are
`
`registered practitioners.
`
`3.
`
`Mr. Brown is a Shareholder at the law firm of Greenberg Traurig,
`
`LLP (“Greenberg”). Mr. Brown joined Greenberg as a Shareholder in
`
`October 2010. (Declaration of Nicholas A. Brown in Support of LG’s
`
`Unopposed Motion for pro hac vice Admission of Nicholas A. Brown
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).)
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`4.
`
`Mr. Brown is an experienced litigating attorney and has specific
`
`experience in patent law and patent law litigation. Mr. Brown has
`
`represented clients in numerous patent infringement actions across the
`
`country. Mr. Brown has litigated matters through trial and appeal.
`
`(Id.)
`
`5.
`
`Mr. Brown is a member in good standing of the California State Bar.
`
`(Id.)
`
`6.
`
`Mr. Brown has never been suspended or disbarred from practice
`
`before any court or administrative body. (Id.)
`
`7.
`
`No application filed by Mr. Brown for admission to practice before
`
`any court or administrative body has ever been denied. (Id.)
`
`8.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations have been imposed against Mr.
`
`Brown by any court or administrative body. (Id.)
`
`9.
`
`Mr. Brown has read and agrees to comply with the Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in
`
`part 42 of the C.F.R. (Id.)
`
`10. Mr. Brown understands that he will be subject to the USPTO Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary
`
`jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. §11.19(a). (Id.)
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`11. Mr. Brown is currently or soon will be seeking pro hac vice admission
`
`in the following matters filed by LG: IPR Nos. 2015-01983, 2015-
`
`01984, and 2015-01985. In the past three years, Mr. Brown has
`
`applied to appear pro hac vice in one other proceeding before the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office, IPR2014-00070. (Id.)
`
`Mr. Brown was admitted pro hac vice in that proceeding. (Id.)
`
`12. Mr. Brown has an established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this, and the other related proceedings noted in Paragraph 11,
`
`supra. Mr. Brown regularly represents LG in matters relating to its
`
`patents. For example, Mr. Brown represented LG in Core Wireless
`
`Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al., Case Nos. 2:14-cv-
`
`911 (lead case) and 2:14-cv-912 (consolidated) (E.D. TEX.), which
`
`involved the same patents at issue in the matters filed by Core
`
`Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. (“Core Wireless”) noted in Paragraph
`
`11, supra. As a result of Mr. Brown’s representation of LG in that
`
`and other matters, Mr. Brown has acquired substantial understanding
`
`of the underlying technological issues at stake in this matter and the
`
`other matters filed by Core Wireless noted in Paragraph 11, supra.
`
`IV. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`NICHOLAS A. BROWN
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01985
`
`The facts outlined above in the Statement of Facts, and contained in the
`
`Declaration of Nicholas A. Brown, establish that there is good cause to admit Mr.
`
`Brown pro hac vice in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10. LG’s lead and
`
`backup counsel are registered practitioners. Mr. Brown is an experienced litigating
`
`attorney and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this,
`
`and the other related proceedings noted in Section III., Paragraph 11, supra.
`
`V.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`In light of the foregoing, LG Electronics, Inc and LG Electronics
`
`Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. respectfully requests that the Board admit Nicholas A.
`
`Brown pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Date: April 25, 2016
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Eric J. Maiers/
`By: Herbert H. Finn
`Registration No. 38,139
`Eric J. Maiers
`Registration No. 59,614
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`77 West Wacker Drive
`Suite 3100
`Chicago, Illinois 60601
`(312) 456-8449
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`6
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on the below date, I caused the
`
`foregoing to be served upon the following counsel of record via electronic mail,
`
`pursuant to the parties’ agreement:
`
`Tarek N. Fahmi
`Ascenda Law Group, PC
`333 W. San Carlos St., Suite 200
`San Jose, CA 95110
`Tel: 866-877-4883
`Fax: 408-773-6177
`Email: patents@ascendalaw.com
`
`Date:
`
`April 25, 2016
`
`/Sambath Meas/
`Sambath Meas