`
`
`
`
`
`
`Filed: May 15, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`VILOX TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2018-00044
`Patent No. 7,302,423 B2
`____________________
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR
`PRO HAC VICE ADMISION OF CECIL E. KEY
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00044
`Patent No. 7,302,423
`
`Patent Owner Vilox Technologies LLC (“Vilox” or “Patent Owner”)
`
`respectfully requests that the Board recognize and admit Cecil E. Key as counsel pro
`
`hac vice to represent Vilox during the above-captioned proceeding. The bases and
`
`support for Vilox’s requests are as follows.
`
` 1. Timing of Vilox’s Request
`
`Vilox’s motion is being filed no sooner than twenty-one (21) days after the
`
`service of the petition.
`
` 2. Good Cause Basis for Vilox’s Request
`
`The Board may recognize counsel pro hac vice during a proceeding upon a
`
`showing of good cause, subject to the condition that lead counsel is a registered
`
`practitioner and a declaration of the party seeking admission is included with the
`
`Request. 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Good cause has been shown where, for example,
`
`the attorney for which pro hac vice admission is sought is an experienced patent
`
`litigator and has a familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding, and
`
`the admission of the party’s counsel will facilitate the party’s ability to effectively
`
`participate in the proceeding. Vilox respectfully submits that all of these conditions
`
`have been met here.
`
`Vilox’s lead counsel, John K. Harrop, is a registered practitioner. As
`
`demonstrated by his declaration, Mr. Key is an experienced litigator who has
`
`litigated patent infringement cases for various parties in federal district courts
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00044
`Patent No. 7,302,423
`
`throughout the United States and before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
`
`Id. at ¶¶ 3-7. Mr. Key’s legal career spans over twenty (20) years. See Id. at ¶ 2.
`
`Mr. Key has extensive experience in litigating patent infringement cases and has
`
`served as lead counsel in such cases. Id. at ¶ 6. Mr. Key has been previously
`
`admitted to practice pro hac vice before the Board and participated in the trial before
`
`the Board in the matter of Salesforce.com, Inc. v. VirtualAgility Inc., CBM2013-
`
`00024. Id. at ¶ 11.
`
`Mr. Key is familiar with the subject matter of this proceeding. He served as
`
`lead counsel for Vilox in various matters before the U.S. District Court for the
`
`Eastern District of Texas in which Vilox’s patents were asserted. Id. at ¶ 12. He has
`
`also represented Vilox in negotiations regarding the licensing of Vilox’s patents. Id.
`
`As a result of this representation, Mr. Key is familiar with Vilox’s technological
`
`innovations and patent portfolio. Mr. Key is thus familiar with the patented
`
`technology, the patent at issue, and the prior art. Id. at ¶¶ 12-13.
`
`Vilox submits that Mr. Key’s participation will assist it and its lead counsel in
`
`effectively participating in this proceeding and will facilitate timely completion of
`
`the trial proceeding.
`
`Mr. Key has never been suspended, disbarred, sanctioned or cited for
`
`contempt by any court or administrative body, and has never had an application for
`
`admission to practice before a court or agency denied. Id. at ¶¶ 7-8. Mr. Key is a
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00044
`Patent No. 7,302,423
`
`member in good standing of the Bars of Virginia and the District of Columbia. Id.
`
`at ¶ 2. Mr. Key agrees to be subject to the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, the
`
`Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of 37 C.F.R, and the USPTO’s
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq., and submit
`
`to disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a). Id. at ¶¶ 9-10.
`
`3. Conclusion
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Vilox respectfully requests that the PTAB
`
`recognize Cecil E. Key as its counsel, pro hac vice, in this proceeding.
`
`Dated: May 15, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`By: /John K. Harrop/
`
`John K. Harrop
`
`Reg. No. 41,817
`
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that on the date
`
`Case IPR2018-00044
`Patent No. 7,302,423
`
`
`indicated below, a complete and entire copy of this submission was provided by
`
`email to Petitioner’s counsel via email, as agreed to by Petitioner’s Service
`
`Information in the October 6, 2017 Petition submission, by serving the email
`
`address of record as follows:
`
`David M. O’Dell, Reg. No. 42,044 (David.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com)
`
`Dated: May 15, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`By: /John K. Harrop/
`
`John K. Harrop
`
`Reg. 41,817
`
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
