`______________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________________
`
`APOTEX INC. and APOTEX CORP.,
`Petitioners,
` v.
`NOVARTIS AG,
`Patent Owner.
`______________________
`Case IPR2017-00854
`U.S. Patent No. 9,187,405
`______________________
`
`MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF
`ROBERT W. TRENCHARD
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Statement of Precise Relief Requested
`Novartis AG (“Novartis”) hereby respectfully requests that the Patent Trial
`
`and Appeal Board (the “Board”) admit Robert W. Trenchard pro hac vice in this
`
`proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Good cause exists for the Board to grant
`
`Novartis’s motion. Further, Petitioners Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (collectively,
`
`“Apotex”) and Novartis have met and conferred, and Apotex does not object to
`
`Novartis’s motion.
`
`II.
`
`Statement of Facts Showing Good Cause for the Board to Recognize
`Counsel Pro Hac Vice During the Proceeding
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may admit counsel pro hac vice for
`
`good cause, so long as lead counsel is a registered practitioner and subject to any
`
`other conditions the Board requires. Under Section 42.10(c), good cause includes
`
`when “counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.”
`
`This application satisfies the requirements of Section 42.10(c):
`
`1.
`
`Lead counsel, Jane M. Love, Ph.D., the undersigned, is a registered
`
`practitioner.
`
`2. Mr. Trenchard is an experienced litigator and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue here, as shown in his accompanying
`
`April 14, 2017 Declaration. (Ex. 2001 (Trenchard Declaration).) That declaration
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`shows that Mr. Trenchard has been a litigator for 22 years. He is a member in good
`
`standing of the New York and New Jersey State Bars, and is also admitted in several
`
`federal courts. He is also familiar with the subject matter of this case, including U.S.
`
`Pat. No. 9,187,405 (the “’405 patent”), the patent’s prosecution history, the
`
`underlying technology, and the prior art cited by the petitioner in this matter. In
`
`addition, he represents Novartis in related litigation and has met with ’405 patent
`
`inventors and authors of art cited in the Petition. (Ex. 2001 ¶¶ 2-7.)
`
`3.
`
`In his declaration, Mr. Trenchard also attests to each of the listed items
`
`required by the Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission in Unified
`
`Patents Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7. (See Ex. 2001.)
`
`III. Conclusion
`For the foregoing reasons, Novartis respectfully requests that the Board admit
`
`Robert W. Trenchard pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`/Jane M. Love, Ph.D./
`Jane M. Love, Ph.D., Reg. No. 42,812
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10166
`Jlove@gibsondunn.com
`Tel.: 212-351-3922
`Dated: May 1, 2017
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 4.26, I hereby certify that on May 1, 2017, true and
`
`accurate copies of:
`
` Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Robert W. Trenchard;
`
` Ex. 2001: Declaration of Robert W. Trenchard in Support of Motion for
`
`Admission Pro Hac Vice; and
`
` Ex. 2002: Order Admitting Robert W. Trenchard Pro Hac Vice, Torrent
`
`Pharm. Ltd. v. Novartis AG, IPR2014-00784 (Paper 8)
`
`were served via electronic mail, on the following counsel of record for Petitioner:
`
`Steven W. Parmelee: sparmelee@wsgr.com
`Michael T. Rosato: mrosato@wsgr.com
`Jad. A. Mills: jmills@wsgr.com
`
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
`Seattle, WA 98104
`Telephone: 206-883-2542
`
`/Jane M. Love, Ph.D./
`Jane M. Love, Ph.D.
`Reg. No. 42,812
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 1, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
