UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________________
`
`COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ROBERT BOSCH LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`______________________
`
`CASE NO. IPR2016-00034
`U.S. Patent No. 6,973,698
`______________________
`
`
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`OF JOSEPH PURCELL PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________________
`
`COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ROBERT BOSCH LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`______________________
`
`CASE NO. IPR2016-00034
`U.S. Patent No. 6,973,698
`______________________
`
`
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION
`OF JOSEPH PURCELL PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owner Robert Bosch LLC
`
`respectfully requests that the Board admit Joseph Purcell pro hac vice as back-up
`
`counsel in this proceeding.
`
`I.
`
`Statement of Facts Showing There is a Good Cause for the Board to
`Admit Counsel Pro Hac Vice
`“The Board may recognize counsel pro hac vice in 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.” 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.10(c). “[W]here 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 a
`
`showing that counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.” Id. The facts here
`
`establish good cause for the Board to admit Joseph Purcell pro hac vice during this
`
`proceeding, so that he may participate in, inter alia, oral hearings, depositions, and
`
`conferences with the Board.
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Lead Counsel, Patrick R. Colsher, is a registered practitioner.
`
`As set forth in the accompanying Declaration of Joseph Purcell in
`
`Support of Patent Owner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice, Exhibit 2027,
`
`(“Purcell Decl.”), Mr. Purcell is admitted to practice law in New York, and in the
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Purcell Decl., ¶ 3.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`3. Mr. Purcell has not been suspended or disbarred from practice before
`
`any court or administrative body; denied admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body; or sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body. Purcell Decl., ¶¶ 6–8.
`
`4. Mr. Purcell is an experienced litigating attorney with a focus on patent
`
`infringement proceedings. Purcell Decl., ¶ 4.
`
`5. Mr. Purcell has an established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this proceeding. He has been involved as an attorney on behalf of Patent
`
`Owner in the ongoing district court and inter partes review proceedings involving
`
`the patent-at-issue in this IPR proceeding. During the course of his involvement,
`
`he has spent a substantial amount of time becoming familiar with the patent-at-
`
`issue in this proceeding, as well as the patents in related inter partes review
`
`proceedings, including the underlying wiper blade technology and pertinent prior
`
`art. This experience provides Mr. Purcell with an established familiarity with the
`
`subject matter at issue in the current proceeding. Purcell Decl., ¶ 5.
`
`6. Mr. Purcell has attested that he 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 37 C.F.R.; and will be subject to the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§
`
`11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct as set forth in Changes to Representation of
`
`Others Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office; Final Rule, 78 Fed.
`
`Reg. 20180 (Apr. 3, 2013) (effective May 3, 2013). Purcell Decl., ¶¶ 9–10.
`
`7. Mr. Purcell is also applying to appear pro hac vice in the following
`
`inter partes review proceedings between Petition and Patent Owner: IPR2016-
`
`00036, IPR2016-00038, IPR2016-00039, IPR2016-00040, and IPR2016-00041. In
`
`the past three years, he has not applied for or been admitted pro hac vice in any
`
`other inter partes review proceedings. Purcell Decl., ¶ 11.
`
`II. Conclusion
`
`The requirement for admission pro hac vice being hereby established, Patent
`
`Owner respectfully requests that the Board admit Joseph Purcell pro hac vice as
`
`backup counsel in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Dated: November 28, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Patrick R. Colsher /
`Patrick R. Colsher
`Reg. No. 74,955
`Shearman & Sterling LLP
`599 Lexington Ave
`New York, NY 10022
`
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`Robert Bosch LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing Patent Owner’s Motion
`
`for Admission pro hac vice of Joseph Purcell and Exhibit 2027 were served via
`
`electronic mail on November 28, 2016, on the following counsel for Petitioner:
`
`Richard M. Koehl (richard.koehl@hugheshubbard.com)
`James R. Klaiber (james.klaiber@hugheshubbard.com)
`David E. Lansky (david.lansky@hugheshubbard.com)
`Stefanie Lopatkin (stefanie.lopatkin@hugheshubbard.com)
`
`/Patrick R. Colsher/
`Patrick R. Colsher
`599 Lexington Ave
`New York, NY 10022
`Tel: (212) 848-4000
`
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`Robert Bosch LLC
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
