`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper: 41
`Entered: July 13, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
`USA, INC., and AKORN INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ALLERGAN, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`Case IPR2016-01127 (8,685,930 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01128 (8,629,111 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01129 (8,642,556 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01130 (8,633,162 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01131 (8,648,048 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01132 (9,248,191 B2) 1
`_______________
`
`Before SHERIDAN K. SNEDDEN and CHRISTOPHER G. PAULRAJ,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`SNEDDEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues that are the same in the identified cases. The
`parties are authorized to use this style heading when filing a single paper in
`each proceeding, provided that such heading includes a footnote attesting
`that “the word-for-word identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified
`in the heading.”
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01127 (8,685,930 B2); IPR2016-01128 (8,629,111 B2);
`IPR2016-01129 (8,642,556 B2); IPR2016-01130 (8,633,162 B2);
`IPR2016-01131 (8,648,048 B2); IPR2016-01132 (9,248,191 B2)
`
`
`Petitioner moves for pro hac vice admission of Anna G. Phillips in
`each of these proceedings. See, e.g., IPR2016-01127, Paper 39. Petitioner
`provides a declaration from Ms. Phillips in support of its motion. Ex. 1133.
`Patent Owner did not file an opposition to Petitioner’s motion.
`Based on the facts set forth in the motion and the accompanying
`declaration from Ms. Phillips, we conclude that Ms. Phillips has sufficient
`legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner and that there is a
`need for Petitioner to have counsel with experience as a litigation attorney in
`intellectual property matters involved in these cases. Accordingly, Petitioner
`has established good cause for Ms. Phillips’s pro hac vice admission. Ms.
`Phillips will be permitted to appear pro hac vice as back-up counsel only.
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Anna G. Phillips is granted, and Ms. Phillips is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Phillips 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
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Phillips 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.
`
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01127 (8,685,930 B2); IPR2016-01128 (8,629,111 B2);
`IPR2016-01129 (8,642,556 B2); IPR2016-01130 (8,633,162 B2);
`IPR2016-01131 (8,648,048 B2); IPR2016-01132 (9,248,191 B2)
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Steven W. Parmelee
`Michael T. Rosato
`Jad A. Mills
`WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
`sparmelee@wsgr.com
`mrosato@wsgr.com
`jmills@wsgr.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Dorothy Whelan
`Michael Kane
`Susan Coletti
`Robert Oakes
`Jonathan Singer
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`IPR13351-0008IP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`coletti@fr.com
`oakes@fr.com
`singer@fr.com
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`