`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`Apple, Inc.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`California Institute of Technology
`Patent Owner
`
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF JAMES M. DOWD
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`
`
`I. STATEMENT OF RELIEF REQUESTED
`Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Apple”) respectfully requests that the
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) enter an order granting the pro hac vice
`
`admission of James M. Dowd as back-up counsel for Apple in Case IPR2017-
`
`00728. Apple has conferred with counsel for Patent Owner, who does not oppose
`
`this motion.
`
`II. APPLICABLE RULE
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the “Board 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 and to any other conditions as the
`
`Board may impose.” “[A] motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel who is not a
`
`registered practitioner may be granted upon showing that counsel is an experienced
`
`litigating attorney and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue
`
`in the proceeding.”
`
`The Board set forth requirements for filing motions for pro hac vice
`
`admission in Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-00639,
`
`Paper 7 (“Order – Authorizing Motion For Pro Hac Vice Admission – 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42.10”) (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013). A motion seeking pro hac vice must be filed no
`
`sooner than twenty-one (21) days after service of the petition, “must contain a
`
`statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize counsel
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`pro hac vice during the proceeding [,]” and must be accompanied by a declaration
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`or affidavit of the individual seeking pro hac vice admission.” Id. at 2-3. The
`
`affidavit or declaration must attest to: (1) membership in good standing of the Bar
`
`of at least one State or the District of Columbia; (2) no suspensions or disbarments
`
`from any practice before any court or administrative body; (3) no application for
`
`admission to practice before any court or administrative body ever denied; (4) no
`
`sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court or administrative body; (5)
`
`the individual seeking to appear has read and will comply with the Office Patent
`
`Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42
`
`of 37 C.F.R.; (6) the individual will be subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional
`
`Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under
`
`37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a); (7) all other proceedings before the Office for which the
`
`individual has applied to appear pro hac vice in the last three (3) years; and (8)
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.”
`
`III. FACTS SHOWING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE BOARD TO RECOGNIZE
`COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE DURING THE PROCEEDING
`On January 20, 2017, Petitioner filed three inter partes review petitions in
`
`IPR2017-00700, -00701 and -00728 directed to U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032 (“’032
`
`patent”). Patent Owner was served on the same day. Petitioner’s lead counsel,
`
`Richard Goldenberg is a registered practitioner (Registration No. 38,095). James
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`M. Dowd, a partner at Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr, LLP, seeks pro
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`hac vice admission in this proceeding. Accompanying this motion as Exhibit 1227
`
`is the Declaration of James M. Dowd in Support of Motion for Admission Pro Hac
`
`Vice (“Dowd Decl.”).
`
`Mr. Dowd is a member of good standing of the State Bar of California, the
`
`District of Columbia Bar, and the Virginia State Bar. See Dowd Decl. ¶¶ 2-3 (Ex.
`
`1227). He has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court or
`
`administrative body, and has never been denied admission to practice before any
`
`court or administrative body. See Dowd Decl. ¶¶ 5-6 (Ex. 1227). No court or
`
`administrative body has ever imposed sanctions or contempt citations on Mr.
`
`Dowd. See Dowd Dec. ¶ 7 (Ex. 1227).
`
`Mr. Dowd has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of 37 C.F.R.
`
`See Dowd Decl. ¶ 8 (Ex. 1227). Mr. Dowd understands that he will be subject to
`
`the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq.
`
`and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a). See Dowd Decl. ¶ 9 (Ex.
`
`1227).
`
`Within the last three years, Mr. Dowd has applied to appear pro hac vice in
`
`the following proceedings:
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-3-
`
`
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-00130;
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01279;
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01277;
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01377;
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01362;
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01375; and
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-4-
`
`
`
` ASML Netherlands BV, ASML US, Inc., Excelitas Technologies Corp.,
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`and Qioptic Photonics GmbH & Co. KG v. Energetiq Technology, Inc.,
`
`Case IPR2015-01368.
`
`See Dowd Decl. ¶ 10 (Ex. 1227).
`
`As his accompanying declaration demonstrates, Mr. Dowd has an
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. Mr.
`
`Dowd is an experienced patent litigator with 20 years of experience. See Dowd
`
`Decl. ¶ 1 (Ex. 1227). Mr. Dowd has reviewed the ’032 patent and its file history,
`
`as well as the Petition, Institution Decision, and the exhibits in this proceeding.
`
`See Dowd Decl. ¶ 11 (Ex. 1227). Mr. Dowd has been involved in numerous patent
`
`litigations, has litigated matters that concerned PTO rules and regulations, and has
`
`previously appeared pro hac vice before the Board. See Dowd Decl. ¶ 4 (Ex.
`
`1227). Furthermore, Mr. Dowd represents the defendants, including Apple, in The
`
`California Institute of Technology v. Broadcom Ltd., et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-
`
`3714-GW-AGRx (“Caltech litigation”), one of the Related Matters identified in
`
`Apple’s Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,916,032.1 See
`
`Dowd. Decl. ¶ 12 (Ex. 1227). Through those litigations, Mr. Dowd developed
`
`extensive experience with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. For
`
`example, he was involved in drafting briefing regarding claim construction for, and
`
`
`1 IPR2017-00728, Paper 5.
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-5-
`
`
`
`the validity of, the ’032 patent in the Related Matters. Mr. Dowd also took and
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`defended expert depositions in the Related Matters regarding invalidity of the ’032
`
`patent. See Dowd Decl. ¶ 13 (Ex. 1227).
`
`IV. CONCLUSION
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board admit
`
`James M. Dowd pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Michael Smith/
`Michael Smith
`Registration No. 71,190
`
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-6-
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on October 27, 2017, I caused a true and correct copy
`
`of the foregoing materials, named below:
`
` Petitioner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of James M.
`Dowd
` Petitioner’s Updated List of Exhibits
` Exhibit 1227: Declaration of James M. Dowd in Support of Motion
`for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`
`to be served via electronic mail on the following correspondents of record as listed
`
`in Patent Owners’ Mandatory Notices:
`
`Michael Rosato (mrosato@wsgr.com)
`Matthew Argenti (margenti@wsgr.com)
`Richard Torczon (rtorczon@wsgr.com)
`
`__/Michael Smith__________
`Michael Smith
`Registration No. 71,190
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-7-
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`
`PETITIONER’S UPDATE LIST OF EXHIBITS FOR
`IPR2017-00728
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`Description
`
`D. J. C. MacKay, S. T. Wilson, and M. C. Davey, “Comparison of
`constructions of irregular Gallager codes,” IEEE Trans. Commun.,
`Vol. 47, No. 10, pp. 1449-54, 1999
`
`L. Ping, W. K. Leung, N. Phamdo, “Low Density Parity Check Codes
`with Semi-random Parity Check Matrix.” Electron. Letters, Vol. 35,
`No. 1, pp. 38-39, 1999
`
`Exhibit
`1201
`
`1202
`
`1203
`
`1204
`
`Declaration of Professor James Davis, Ph.D. (“Davis Declaration”)
`
`1205
`
`1206
`
`1207
`
`Gallager, R., Low-Density Parity-Check Codes, Monograph, M.I.T.
`Press, 1963
`
`Berrou et al., “Near Shannon Limit Error-Correcting Coding and
`Decoding: Turbo-Codes," ICC ’93, Technical Program, Conference
`Record 1064, Geneva 1993
`
`Benedetto, S. et al., Serial Concatenation of Block and Convolutional
`Codes, 32.10 Electronics Letters 887-8, 1996
`
`1208
`
`Luby, M. et al., “Practical Loss-Resilient Codes,” STOC ’97, 1997
`
`1209
`
`1210
`
`Luby, M. et al., “Analysis of Low Density Codes and Improved
`Designs Using Irregular Graphs,” STOC ’98, pp. 249-58, published in
`1998
`
`Replacement copy of Frey, B. J. and MacKay, D. J. C., “Irregular
`Turbocodes,” Proc. 37th Allerton Conf. on Comm., Control and
`Computing, Monticello, Illinois, published on or before March 20,
`2000
`
`1211
`
`Final Written Decision, Hughes Network Systems, LLC et al. v. Cal.
`Institute of Tech., IPR2015-00059, Paper 42 (PTAB Apr. 21, 2016)
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-8-
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`Exhibit
`1212
`
`Description
`Certificate of Correction, U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032 (Sept. 2, 2008)
`
`1213
`
`1214
`
`Claim Construction Order, California Institute of Technology v.
`Hughes Communications Inc., No. 13-cv-7245 (C.D. Cal.)
`
`Decision on Institution, Hughes Network Systems, LLC et al. v. Cal.
`Institute of Tech., IPR2015-00059, Paper 18 (PTAB Apr. 27, 2015)
`
`1215
`
`Expert Report of Dr. Brendan Frey (Case No. 2:13-cv-07245)
`
`1216
`
`1217
`
`MacKay, D. J. C, and Neal, R. M. “Near Shannon Limit Performance
`of Low Density Parity Check Codes,” Electronics Letters, vol. 32, pp.
`1645-46, 1996
`
`Replacement copy of D. Divsalar, H. Jin, and R. J. McEliece, “Coding
`theorems for "turbo-like" codes,” Proc. 36th Allerton Conf. on Comm.,
`Control and Computing, Monticello, Illinois, pp. 201-9, September
`1998
`
`1218
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,271,520 (1981)
`
`1219
`
`Declaration of Robin Fradenburgh Concerning the “Proceedings, 36th
`Allerton Conference on Communications, Control, and Computing”
`Reference
`
`1220
`
`Chris Heegard and Stephen B. Wicker, Turbo Coding, pp. 12-14, 1999
`
`1221
`
`George C. Clark, Jr. and J. Bibb Cain, Error-Correction Coding for
`Digital Communications, pp. 6, 229, 1938
`
`1222
`
`Pfister, H. and Siegel, P., “The Serial Concatenation of Rate-1 Codes
`Through Uniform Random Interleavers,” 37th Allerton Conf. on
`Comm., Control and Computing, Monticello, Illinois, published on or
`before September 24, 1999
`
`1223
`
`Replacement copy of Declaration of Paul H. Siegel (“Siegel
`Declaration”)
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-9-
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00728
`U.S. Patent No. 7,421,032
`
`Description
`Kschischang, F.R., and Frey, B.J., “Iterative decoding of compound
`codes by probability propagation in graphical models,” IEEE Journal
`on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 219-230,
`1998
`
`Declaration Of Richard Goldenberg In Support Of Unopposed Motions
`To Submit Replacement Exhibits Pursuant To 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c)
`
`Declaration Of Jonathan Barbee In Support Of Unopposed Motions To
`Submit Replacement Exhibits Pursuant To 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c)
`
`Declaration of James M. Dowd in Support of Motion for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice
`
`Declaration of Mark Selwyn in Support of Motion for Admission Pro
`Hac Vice
`
`Exhibit
`
`1224
`
`1225
`
`1226
`
`1227
`
`1228
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 165304245
`
`-10-
`
`