`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`V.
`
`ROBERT BOSCH LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`CASE NO. IPR2016-00036
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,944,905
`
`DECLARATION OF JOSEPH PURCELL IN SUPPORT OF PATENT
`OWNER’S MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
`
`Bosch Exhibit 2027 — Page 1
`Costco (Petitioner) v. Bosch (Patent Owner)
`IPR2016-00036
`
`
`
`1, Joseph Purcell, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am an attorney at the law firm of Shearman & Sterling LLP, located
`
`at 599 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10022.
`
`2.
`
`I make this declaration in support of Patent Owner Robert Bosch
`
`LLC’s Motion for my admission pro hac vice.
`
`3.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of New York.
`
`I am also
`
`duly admitted and authorized to practice law before the United States Court of
`
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`4.
`
`I have been practicing law and litigating cases for several years,
`
`focusing on patent infringement matters in federal court.
`
`5.
`
`I have 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 my involvement, I have 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. As a
`
`result, I have become extremely familiar with the subject matter at issue in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`Bosch Exhibit 2027 — Page 2
`Costco (Petitioner) v. Bosch (Patent Owner)
`IPR2016-00036
`
`
`
`6.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from practice in any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`7.
`
`I have never been denied admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`8.
`
`I have never been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`9.
`
`I have read and will comply with the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for
`
`Trials set forth in Part 42 of 37 C.F.R.
`
`10.
`
`I 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).
`
`I also will be subject to the
`
`USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct 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).
`
`11.
`
`I am also applying for admission pro hac vice in the following inter
`
`partes review proceedings between Petition and Patent Owner: IPR2016-00034,
`
`IPR2016-00038, IPR2016-00039, IPRZO16-00040, and IPR2016-00041.
`
`In the
`
`Bosch Exhibit 2027 — Page 3
`Costco (Petitioner) v. Bosch (Patent Owner)
`IPR2016-00036
`
`
`
`past three years, I have not applied for or been admitted pro hac vice in any other
`
`inter partes review proceedings.
`
`I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my knowledge are true
`
`and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true; and
`
`further 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 § 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Dated: November 28, 2016
`
`%%‘_\*'''‘'"_r
`
`oseph Purcell
`Back-up Counsel for Patent Owner
`Shearman & Sterling LLP
`599 Lexington Avenue
`212.848.4074
`
`Joseph.Purcell@Shearman.com
`
`Bosch Exhibit 2027 — Page 4
`Costco (Petitioner) v. Bosch (Patent Owner)
`IPR2016-00036
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
