`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 13
`
`Entered: June 16, 2016
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ADAPTIVE HEADLAMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL P. TIERNEY, RAMA G. ELLURU, and
`SCOTT C. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Granting Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`of David A. Skeels
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`
`
`Patent Owner has filed a motion to have Mr. David A. Skeels
`
`admitted pro hac vice in this proceeding. Paper 6. Patent Owner has also
`
`submitted a declaration from Mr. Skeels in support of this motion. Ex. 2001.
`
`Petitioner has not filed an opposition to Patent Owner’s motion.
`
`Based on the facts set forth in the motion and the accompanying
`
`declaration, we conclude that Mr. Skeels has sufficient legal and technical
`
`qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this proceeding, that Mr. Skeels
`
`has demonstrated the necessarily familiarity with the subject matter of these
`
`cases, and that there is a need for Patent Owner to be represented by counsel
`
`who has experience litigating the challenged patent. Accordingly, Patent
`
`Owner has established good cause for the admission of Mr. Skeels pro hac
`
`vice. Mr. Skeels will be permitted to serve as back-up counsel only. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`Accordingly, it is hereby:
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion to admit Mr. David A. Skeels
`
`pro hac vice (Paper 6) is granted, and Mr. Skeels is authorized to represent
`
`Patent Owner as back-up counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner continue to have a registered
`
`practitioner serve as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Skeels 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
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00193
`Patent 7,241,034 C1
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Skeels is subject to the Office’s
`
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and to the USPTO
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`David Cotta
`Peter Cuomo
`Kongsik Kim
`Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
`dcotta@mintz.com
`pjcuomo@mintz.com
`kkim@mintz.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brett M. Pinkus
`Friedman, Suder & Cooke
`pinkus@fsclaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3