`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 21
`Entered: November 15, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC., HTC CORPORATION, and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-00923 (Patent 5,812,789)1
`Case IPR2016-00924 (Patent 5,960,464)2,3
`____________
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, JAMES B. ARPIN, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Unopposed Motions for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Curt Holbreich
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 Case IPR2016-00847 has been joined with this proceeding.
`2 Case IPR2016-00848 has been joined with this proceeding.
`3 This Decision addresses an issue that is identical in both cases. We, therefore,
`exercise our discretion to issue one Decision to be filed in each case. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style heading in any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00923 (Patent 5,812,789)
`IPR2016-00924 (Patent 5,960,464)
`I. INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner entities, HTC Corp. and HTC America, Inc. (collectively,
`“HTC”), filed Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Curt Holbreich.
`Paper 18 (“Mot.”).4 HTC represents that neither Petitioner entity, Apple
`Inc., nor Patent Owner, Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC,
`opposes these Motions. Mot. 2. For the reasons provided below, HTC’s
`Motions are granted.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we 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. The
`representative Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission requires
`a statement of facts showing there is good cause for us to recognize counsel
`pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to
`appear. See Paper 4, 2 (citing Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC,
`Case IPR2013-00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (representative
`“Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”)).
`In these proceedings, lead counsel for HTC, Mr. Joseph A. Micallef,
`is a registered practitioner. Mot. 3. HTC asserts that there is good cause for
`us to recognize Mr. Holbreich pro hac vice in these proceedings. Mot. 3–5.
`HTC’s assertions in this regard are supported by the Declaration of Mr.
`Holbreich. Ex. 1041.
`
`
`4 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the papers filed in Case IPR2016-
`00923. Similar papers were filed in Case IPR2016-00924.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00923 (Patent 5,812,789)
`IPR2016-00924 (Patent 5,960,464)
`Mr. Holbreich declares that he is a member in good standing of the
`Bar of the State of California. Ex. 1041 ¶ 1. Mr. Holbreich also declares
`that he is familiar with the subject matter at issue in these proceedings,
`particularly because he represents HTC in the related district court case.
`Id. ¶¶ 8, 9. The facts alleged in the Declaration of Mr. Holbreich satisfy all
`the remaining requirements set forth in our representative Order authorizing
`motions for pro hac vice admission. See Ex. 1041 ¶¶ 2–7, 10; Mot. 3–5.
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Holbreich has sufficient legal
`and technical qualifications to represent HTC in these proceedings.
`Accordingly, HTC has established that there is good cause for the pro hac
`vice admission of Mr. Holbreich in these proceedings.
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Unopposed Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Curt Holbreich are granted. Mr. Holbreich is authorized
`to represent HTC as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that HTC is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Holbreich shall 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 Mr. Holbreich shall be subject to the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), as well as the
`Office’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101
`et. seq.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00923 (Patent 5,812,789)
`IPR2016-00924 (Patent 5,960,464)
`For PETITIONER:
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`David W. O’Brien
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`david.obrien.ipr@haynesboones.com
`
`Joseph A. Micallef
`Samuel A. Dillon
`Sidley Austin LLP
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`samuel.dillon@sidley.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Masood Anjom
`Scott Clark
`Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing P.C.
`manjom@azalaw.com
`sclark@azalaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`