`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 14
`
`
` Entered: June 9, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`IMMERSION CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-01603 (Patent 8,581,710 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01372 (Patent 8,659,571 B2)
`Case IPR2016-01381 (Patent 8,773,356 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, BRYAN F. MOORE, NEIL T. POWELL,
`and MINN CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHUNG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Unopposed Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Robert Williams
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses an issue that is identical in all three 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.
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01603 (Patent 8,581,710 B2)
`IPR2016-01372 (Patent 8,659,571 B2)
`IPR2016-01381 (Patent 8,773,356 B2)
`
`
`
`Petitioner, Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”), filed unopposed Motions
`requesting pro hac vice admission of Robert Williams in these proceedings,
`and provided a Declaration from Mr. Williams in support of its request. See
`Paper 14; Ex. 1017.2 Based on the facts set forth in the Motions and
`Declaration, we determine that Petitioner has established good cause for pro
`hac vice admission of Mr. Williams. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c); Unified
`Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-00639, slip op. at 3–4
`(PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (setting forth the requirements for pro hac
`vice admission).
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`Robert Williams are granted, and Mr. Williams is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Williams is to 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
`
`
`2 Unless otherwise indicated, we refer to Papers and Exhibits filed in Case
`IPR2016-01603. Similar Papers and Exhibits were filed in Cases IPR2016-
`01372 and IPR2016-01381.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01603 (Patent 8,581,710 B2)
`IPR2016-01372 (Patent 8,659,571 B2)
`IPR2016-01381 (Patent 8,773,356 B2)
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Williams is to be subject to the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the Office
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101–11.901.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`James M. Heintz
`Brian Erickson
`DLA Piper LLP J
`im.heintz@dlapiper.com
`Apple-Immersion-IPSs@dlapiper.com
`brian.erickson@dlapiper.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Michael R. Fleming
`Babak Redjaian
`Irell & Manella LLP
`mfleming@irell.com
`bredjaian@irell.com
`
`
`3
`
`
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
