`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Reg. No. 36,476
`Heather M. Petruzzi
`Reg. No. 71,270
`Owen K. Allen
`Reg. No. 71,118
`Robert J. Gunther, Jr.
`Pro Hac Vice Pending
`WilmerHale
`1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`
`Adam R. Brausa
`Reg. No. 60,287
`Daralyn J. Durie
`Pro Hac Vice Pending
`Durie Tangri LLP
`217 Leidesdorff Street
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`
`
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`Reg. No. 43,401
`Sidley Austin LLP
`1501 K Street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C.
`20005
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________________________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GENENTECH, INC. AND CITY OF HOPE,
`Patent Owners.
`____________________________________________
`
`Case IPR2016-00710
`U.S. Patent 6,331,415 B1
`____________________________________________
`
`PATENT OWNERS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC
`VICE OF DARALYN J. DURIE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(C)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owners Genentech, Inc.
`
`(“Genentech”) and City of Hope, by and through its attorneys, respectfully request
`
`that the Board admit Daralyn J. Durie pro hac vice in this proceeding, IPR2016-
`
`00710. Petitioner’s counsel has indicated that it does not oppose this motion.
`
`II. GOVERNING LAW, RULES, AND PRECEDENT
`Section 42.10(c) of 37 C.F.R. provides 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.
`
`The Board has specified that a motion for pro hac vice admission shall be
`
`filed in accordance with the “ORDER-AUTHORIZING MOTION FOR PRO HAC
`
`VICE ADMISSION – 37 C.F.R. § 42.10” in Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron,
`
`LLC, Case No. IPR2013-00639 (“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
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`
`seeking to appear” which attests to a number of facts concerning the counsel
`
`seeking admission pro hac vice specified in the Representative Order.
`
`Accompanying this motion as Exhibit 2002 is the Declaration of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`in Support of this Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice (“Durie Decl.”).
`
`III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
`1.
`Patent Owners’ lead counsel, David L. Cavanaugh, is a registered
`
`practitioner (Reg. No. 36,476).
`
`2. Ms. Durie is a Partner at the law firm Durie Tangri LLP. (Durie Decl.
`
`¶ 2, Ex. 2002).
`
`3. Ms. Durie is an experienced litigating attorney and has been litigating
`
`cases relating to patents for over 20 years. (Id. ¶ 2)
`
`4. Ms. Durie is a member in good standing of the California State Bar,
`
`and among other courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`
`(Id. ¶ 3).
`
`5. Ms. Durie has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before
`
`any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 5).
`
`6.
`
`No application filed under Ms. Durie for admission to practice before
`
`any court or administrative body has ever been denied. (Id. ¶ 6).
`
`7.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations have been imposed against Ms.
`
`Durie by any court or administrative body. (Id. ¶ 7).
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`8. Ms. Durie 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 37
`
`C.F.R. (Id. ¶ 8).
`
`9. Ms. Durie understands that she will be subject to the USPTO Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary
`
`jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a). (Id. ¶ 9).
`
`10.
`
`In the last three (3) years, Ms. Durie has appeared Pro Hac Vice
`
`before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in the following cases: Sanofi-Aventis
`
`U.S. LLC and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. and City of
`
`Hope, IPR2015-01624; Genzyme Corporation v. Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope,
`
`IPR2016-00460 (pro hac vice motion filed) (joined with IPR2015-01624);
`
`Genzyme Corporation v. Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope, IPR2016-00383 (pro
`
`hac vice motion filed) (not instituted); Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Genentech,
`
`Inc. and City of Hope, IPR2016-01373 (pro hac vice motion filed). (Id. ¶ 10).
`
`11. Ms. Durie has an established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this proceeding. She has handled patent cases relating to recombinant
`
`antibodies for more than twelve years, including six litigations in which U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,331,415 (“the ’415 patent”) was a patent-in-suit. (Id. ¶ 11). In all of
`
`these cases involving the ’415 patent, she has represented Genentech and in several
`
`of these cases, she also represented City of Hope. During these litigations, she has
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`
`worked closely with Adam R. Brausa, counsel for Genentech and City of Hope in
`
`this matter. (Id.).
`
`12. Additionally, Ms. Durie has carefully reviewed and has developed
`
`extensive familiarity with the matters involved in and implicated by these
`
`proceedings, including the ’415 patent and its file history, the prior art presented in
`
`the petition, and the legal and factual issues raised by the Petitioner in this
`
`proceeding. As a result, Ms. Durie has acquired substantial understanding of the
`
`underlying legal and technological issues at stake in this proceeding. (Id. ¶ 12)
`
`IV. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`DARALYN J. DURIE
`
`The facts outlined above in the Statement of Facts, supported by the
`
`Declaration of Daralyn J. Durie (Ex. 2002), establish there is good cause to admit
`
`Ms. Durie pro hac vice in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10. Patent
`
`Owners’ lead counsel, David L. Cavanaugh, is a registered practitioner in good
`
`standing before the Board. Ms. Durie is an attorney in good standing in the State
`
`Bar of California and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`Ms. Durie has extensive experience litigating patents, including the ’415 patent,
`
`which is the subject of this proceeding. As a result, Ms. Durie is familiar with the
`
`subject matter at issue in this proceeding. Furthermore, Ms. Durie has carefully
`
`reviewed the ’415 patent at issue in this proceeding, its prosecution history, the
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`
`prior art, the grounds advanced by the Petitioner and other aspects of the record in
`
`this proceeding, and is familiar with these matters. Based on her experience and
`
`knowledge, there is good cause to admit Ms. Durie pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`In light of the foregoing, Patent Owners respectfully request that the Board
`
`admit Daralyn J. Durie pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/David L. Cavanaugh/
`David L. Cavanaugh, Reg. No. 36,476
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`HALE AND DORR LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`Tel.: 202-663-6000
`Fax: 202-663-6363
`
`Attorney for Patent Owners
`Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`Dated: September 23, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`PATENT OWNERS’ EXHIBIT LIST
`IPR2016-00710
`
`2001 Declaration of Robert J. Gunther, Jr. in Support of Motion for
`Admission Pro Hac Vice
`2002 Declaration of Daralyn J. Durie in Support of Motion for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2016-00710
`Patent Owners’ Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice Of Daralyn J. Durie
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that, on September 23, 2016, I caused a true and correct
`
`copy of the following materials:
`
` Patent Owners’ Unopposed Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Daralyn
`J. Durie
` Exhibit 2002
` Patent Owners’ Exhibit List
`
`
`to be served via electronic mail on the following attorneys of record:
`
`Deanne M. Mazzochi
`Paul J. Molino
`William A. Rakoczy
`Eric Hunt
`Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP
`6 West Hubbard Street, Suite 500
`Chicago, Illinois 60654
`dmazzochi@rmmslegal.com
`paul@rmmslegal.com
`wrakoczy@rmmslegal.com
`ehunt@rmmslegal.com
`Mylan_IPR_Service@rmmslegal.com
`
`
`
`/Owen K. Allen/
`Owen K. Allen
`Reg. No. 71,118
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`950 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`(650) 600-5029
`
`
`7
`
`ActiveUS 158125311v.1