Filed: September 21, 2017
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA,
`INC. and AKORN INC.,1
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ALLERGAN, INC.
`Patent Owner.
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2016-01127 (US 8,685,930 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01128 (US 8,629,111 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01129 (US 8,642,556 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01130 (US 8,633,162 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01131 (US 8,648,048 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01132 (US 9,248,191 B2)
`___________________
`
`PETITIONER MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.’S MOTION FOR PRO
`HAC VICE ADMISSION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`1 Cases IPR2017-00576 and IPR2017-00594, IPR2017-00578 and IPR2017-
`00596, IPR2017-00579 and IPR2017-00598, IPR2017-00583 and IPR2017-00599,
`IPR2017-00585 and IPR2017-00600, and IPR2017-00586 and IPR2017-00601,
`have respectively been joined with the captioned proceedings. The word-for-word
`identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the caption pursuant to the
`Board’s Scheduling Order (Paper 10).
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA,
`INC. and AKORN INC.,1
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ALLERGAN, INC.
`Patent Owner.
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2016-01127 (US 8,685,930 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01128 (US 8,629,111 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01129 (US 8,642,556 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01130 (US 8,633,162 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01131 (US 8,648,048 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01132 (US 9,248,191 B2)
`___________________
`
`PETITIONER MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.’S MOTION FOR PRO
`HAC VICE ADMISSION UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`1 Cases IPR2017-00576 and IPR2017-00594, IPR2017-00578 and IPR2017-
`00596, IPR2017-00579 and IPR2017-00598, IPR2017-00583 and IPR2017-00599,
`IPR2017-00585 and IPR2017-00600, and IPR2017-00586 and IPR2017-00601,
`have respectively been joined with the captioned proceedings. The word-for-word
`identical paper is filed in each proceeding identified in the caption pursuant to the
`Board’s Scheduling Order (Paper 10).
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
`
`(“Petitioner”) respectfully requests that the Board recognize (1) Shannon M.
`
`Bloodworth, (2) Charles G. Curtis, Jr., (3) Jennifer A. MacLean, (4) Eric D. Miller,
`
`and (5) Benjamin S. Sharp as counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding. Petitioner
`
`seeks the counsel of Shannon Bloodworth due to her experience in pharmaceutical
`
`patent matters. Petitioner seeks the counsel of Charles G. Curtis, Jr., Jennifer A.
`
`MacLean, Eric D. Miller, and Benjamin S. Sharp for their expertise in claims of
`
`Tribal sovereign immunity. This motion is authorized by the Notice of Filing Date
`
`Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary Response
`
`(Paper No. 4).
`
`I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`A. Shannon M. Bloodworth
`
`Ms. Bloodworth is a patent litigation attorney with experience representing
`
`clients in multiple jurisdictions, including United States District Courts and the
`
`Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. Ms. Bloodworth has experience in all stages of
`
`litigation, from preliminary injunction through trial and appeal, and across a wide
`
`range of technologies, including pharmaceutical drugs, formulations, and dosages.
`
`Ms. Bloodworth has previously been admitted pro hac vice to three inter partes
`
`reviews: IPR No. 2015-00643, IPR No. 2015-00644, and IPR No. 2015-00830.
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`B. Charles G. Curtis, Jr.
`
`Mr. Curtis has extensive experience litigating cases involving Indian law in
`
`many different courts across the United States, as well as Federal administrative
`
`boards. Many of these cases have involved disputed claims of Tribal sovereign
`
`immunity. He has represented private and public clients in litigation, agency
`
`proceedings, and business negotiations involving Native American tribes, tribal
`
`entities, and tribal members throughout the country, including with respect to the
`
`St. Regis Mohawk (Akwasasne) Tribe. He also has experience in constitutional,
`
`treaty rights, and intellectual property law.
`
`C.
`
`Jennifer A. MacLean
`
`Ms. MacLean has extensive experience litigating cases involving Indian law
`
`in many different courts across the United States, as well as Federal administrative
`
`boards. She has over 16 years of experience litigating Indian law and tribal
`
`sovereign immunity. Her practice focuses on helping State and local governments,
`
`businesses and community groups navigate issues related to Federal Indian law.
`
`Her experience in this area includes aboriginal land claims, treaty disputes,
`
`compact negotiations, Tribal acknowledgment, and Federal preemption questions.
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`D. Eric D. Miller
`
`Mr. Miller has extensive experience litigating cases involving Indian law,
`
`including in Lewis v. Clarke, 137 S. Ct. 1285 (2017), where he obtained a
`
`unanimous decision establishing that the sovereign immunity of an Indian tribe
`
`does not bar damages actions against tribal employees.
`
`E. Benjamin S. Sharp
`
`Mr. Sharp has extensive experience litigating cases involving Indian law in
`
`many different courts across the United States, as well as Federal administrative
`
`boards, specifically including issues of Tribal sovereign immunity.
`
`F. Meet & Confer
`
`Counsel for the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe indicated that it did not oppose this
`
`motion.
`
`II. DECLARATION OF INDIVIDUAL SEEKING TO APPEAR
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is accompanied by a Declaration of
`
`Shannon M. Bloodworth (EX1138), a Declaration of Charles G. Curtis, Jr.
`
`(EX1139), a Declaration of Jennifer A. MacLean (EX1140), a Declaration of Eric
`
`D. Miller (EX1141), and a Declaration of Benjamin S. Sharp (EX1142). In each
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`declaration, the declarant attests to each of the listed items required by the Order
`
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission in Case IPR2013-00639, Paper 7.
`
`
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`admit Shannon M. Bloodworth, Charles G. Curtis, Jr., Jennifer A. MacLean, Eric
`
`D. Miller, and Benjamin S. Sharp as counsel Pro Hac Vice in this proceeding.
`
`Date: September 21 , 2017
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/ Steven W. Par melee /
`Steven W. Parmelee, Lead Counsel
`Reg. No. 31,990
`
`
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`This is to certify that I caused to be served true and correct copies of the
`
`foregoing Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and corresponding Exhibits (1138-1142) on
`
`this 21st day of September, 2017, on Allergan and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe as
`
`follows:
`
`Dorothy P. Whelan
`Michael Kane
`Susan Morrison Colletti
`Robert M. Oakes
`Jonathan Singer
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`3200 RBC Plaza
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP1@fr.com
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP2@fr.com
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP3@fr.com
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP4@fr.com
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP5@fr.com
`Email: IPR13351-0008IP6@fr.com
`Email: PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`Alfonso Chan
`Joseph DePumpo
`Michael W. Shore
`Christopher L. Evans
`Shore Chan DePumpo LLP
`901 Main Street, Suite 3300
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Email: achan@shorechan.com
`Email: jdepumpo@shorechan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Email: mshore@shorechan.com
`Email: cevans@shorechan.com
`And on the remaining petitioners as follows:
`
`Gary Speier
`Mark Schuman
`CARLSON, CASPERS, VANDENBURGH,
`LINDQUIST & SCHUMAN, P.A.
`225 South Sixth Street, Suite 4200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Email: gspeier@carlsoncaspers.com
`Email: mschuman@carlsoncaspers.com
`Attorneys for Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
`
`Michael Dzwonczyk
`Azadeh Kokabi
`Travis Ribar
`SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
`2100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
`Washington, DC 20037
`Email: mdzwonczyk@sughrue.com
`Email: akokabi@sughrue.com
`Email: tribar@sughrue.com
`Attorneys for Akorn Inc.
`
`Dated: September 21, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/ Steven W. Parmelee /
`Steven W. Parmelee, Lead Counsel
`Reg. No. 31,990
`
`
`
`-7-
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
