`Tel: 571.272.7822
`
`
`Paper 22
`Entered: November 28, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., ZTE (USA) INC.,
`OLYMPUS CORPORATION, and OLYMPUS AMERICA INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00443
`Patent 6,470,399 B11
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JONI Y. CHANG, JENNIFER S. BISK, and JAMES B. ARPIN,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Andrew V. Devkar
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2017-01682 has been joined with IPR2017-00443.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00443
`Patent 6,470,399 B1
`
`
`Petitioner filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Andrew
`V. Devkar (Paper 18), supported by a Declaration of Mr. Devkar
`(Paper 192), in the instant proceedings. The Motion is unopposed.
`Pursuant to 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. In authorizing
`motions for pro hac vice, we require the moving party to provide 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 in the
`proceedings.
`Upon review of Petitioner’s Motion and supporting evidence, we
`determine that Petitioner has demonstrated that Mr. Devkar has sufficient
`legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in these
`proceedings. We also recognize that there is a need for Petitioner to have
`Mr. Devkar be involved in the proceedings at issue. Accordingly, Petitioner
`has established that there is good cause for admitting Mr. Devkar.
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Mr. Devkar are granted; Mr. Devkar is authorized to represent Petitioner as
`back-up counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for these proceedings; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Devkar is to comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as
`
`
`2 Mr. Devkar’s Declaration should have been filed as a separate exhibit and
`labeled correctly in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.63.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00443
`Patent 6,470,399 B1
`
`set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations; and he is to be
`subject to the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a),
`and the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 11.101 et. seq.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00443
`Patent 6,470,399 B1
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Dion Bregman
`Andrew Devkar
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`dion.bregman@morganlewis.com
`andrew.devkar@morganlewis.com
`
`Herbert Finn
`Jonathan Giroux
`GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP
`finnh@gtlaw.com
`girouxj@gtlaw.com
`
`Scott Miller
`Darren Franklin
`SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
`smiller@sheppardmullin.com
`dfranklin@sheppardmullin.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Gregory s. Donahue
`Minghui Yang
`DiNOVO PRICE ELLWANGER & HARDY LLP
`gdonahue@dpelaw.com
`myang@dpelaw.com
`docketing@dpelaw.com
`
`Anthony Meola
`Jason. A. Murphy
`Victor J. Baranowshi
`Arlen L. Olsen
`SCHMEISER, OLSEN & WATTS, LLP
`ameola@iplawusa.com
`jmurphy@iplawsa.com
`vbaranowski@iplawusa.com
`aolsen@iplawusa.com
`
`4
`
`