`Entered: February 9, 2017
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ARISTA NETWORKS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00303 (Patent 6,377,577 B1)
`Case IPR2016-00306 (Patent 7,023,853 B1)
`Case IPR2016-00308 (Patent 7,162,537 B1)
`Case IPR2016-00309 (Patent 7,224,668 B1)1
`___________
`
`
`Before BRYAN F. MOORE, MIRIAM L. QUINN,
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, and PETER P. CHEN,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Petitioner’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Matthew Powers, Paul Ehrlich, and William Nelson
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues that are the same in all four identified cases.
`We exercise our discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading in subsequent papers.
`Citations are to papers filed in IPR2016-00303.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00303, IPR2016-00306, IPR2016-00308, IPR2016-00309
`Patents 6,377,577 B1, 7,023,853 B1, 7,162,537 B1, 7,224,668 B1
`
`
`On January 31, 2017, Petitioner filed Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Messrs. Matthew Powers, Paul Ehrlich, and William Nelson
`(“Motions,” Papers 35, 36, and 37) and an accompanying affidavits in
`support thereof (Exs. 1036–38, respectively). Patent Owner does not oppose
`these motions. Motions 2.
`Upon consideration of the papers presented, Petitioner has
`demonstrated sufficiently that Messrs. Powers, Ehrlich, and Nelson have
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in this
`proceeding. See IPR2013-00639, Paper 7, “Order – Authorizing Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission.” In light of the foregoing, we are persuaded that
`Petitioner has demonstrated good cause for Messrs. Powers, Ehrlich, and
`Nelson to participate in this proceeding as backup counsel. Messrs. Powers,
`Ehrlich, and Nelson may only be designated as backup counsel.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s unopposed motions for pro hac vice
`admission of Messrs. Powers, Ehrlich, and Nelson are granted; Messrs.
`Powers, Ehrlich, and Nelson are authorized to represent Petitioner only as
`back-up counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Messrs. Powers, Ehrlich, and Nelson are
`to comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules
`of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal
`Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Messrs. Powers, Ehrlich, and Nelson are
`to be subject to the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00303, IPR2016-00306, IPR2016-00308, IPR2016-00309
`Patents 6,377,577 B1, 7,023,853 B1, 7,162,537 B1, 7,224,668 B1
`
`§ 11.19(a), and the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37
`C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq.
`
`PETITIONER:
`W. Karl Renner
`Lauren Degnan
`Alex Gelberg
`Michael McKeon
`Jason Wolff
`Linhong Zhang
`Adam Shartzer
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`IPR40963-0003IP4@fr.com
`IPR40963-0004IP4@fr.com
`IPR40963-0006IP3@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`gelberg@fr.com
`mckeon@fr.com
`wolff@fr.com
`shartzer@fr.com
`IPR40963-0005IP1@fr.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Jon E. Wright
`Robert Greene Sterne
`Lori A. Gordon
`Lestin L. Kenton, Jr.
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`jwright-PTAB@skgf.com
`rsterne-PTAB@skgf.com
`lgordon-PTAB@skgf.com
`lkenton-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`3
`
`