`571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 64
`Entered: March 4, 2019
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTEL CORP., CAVIUM, LLC, and
`DELL INC.,1
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`Case IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`Case IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`____________
`
`
`
`Before STEPHEN C. SIU, DANIEL N. FISHMAN, and
`CHARLES J. BOUDREAU, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`FISHMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Brady Cox
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 Cavium, Inc., which filed petitions in Cases IPR2018-00400 and IPR2018-
`00403 and Dell Inc., which filed petitions in IPR2018-01306 and IPR2018-
`01307, were joined as petitioners in IPR2018-00226 and IPR2018-00234,
`respectively. According to updated mandatory notices filed in the captioned
`proceedings, Cavium, Inc. has now been converted to Cavium, LLC. See,
`e.g., IPR2018-00226, Paper 28.
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`Case IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`
`
`
`Petitioner (“Dell Inc.”) filed an Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro
`Hac Vice of Brady Cox in the above-captioned proceedings. IPR2018-
`00226 Paper 69; IPR2018-00234 Paper 60 (collectively “Motions”).
`Petitioner also filed Declarations of Mr. Cox in support of its Motions.2
`IPR2018-00226 Ex. 1503; IPR2018-00234 Ex. 1503. With the exception of
`referring to the Office’s previous Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in
`parts 10 and 11 of 37 C.F.R., instead of the Office’s current Rules of
`Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq. (Ex. 1503 ¶ 8),
`the facts alleged in the Declarations comply with all of the requirements set
`forth in our representative Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice
`admission. See Ex. 1503 ¶¶ 2–5, 7, 8; Mot. 2–3.
`The Motions represents that Patent Owner does not oppose. IPR2018-
`00226 Paper 69, 9; IPR2018-00234 Paper 60, 8. We have reviewed the
`submissions and determined that the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.10 have
`been met and there is good cause to admit Mr. Cox pro hac vice, subject to
`Mr. Cox filing a corrected declaration, separately as an exhibit in each case,
`indicating that he will be subject to the Office’s Rules of Professional
`Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`2 Petitioner’s Motions erroneously refer to the Declaration as Exhibit 1500.
`We located the Declaration as Exhibit 1503 in both cases. We find
`Petitioner’s typographic error to be harmless.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`Case IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`
`
`It is, therefore,
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Unopposed Motions for Admission Pro
`Hac Vice of Brady Cox are provisionally granted, subject to Mr. Cox filing a
`corrected declaration, separately as an exhibit in each case, indicating that he
`will be subject to the Office’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37
`C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Cox will be authorized to represent
`Petitioner only as back-up counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in the instant proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Cox 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
`FURTHER ORDERED that, upon filing corrected declarations,
`Mr. Cox shall be subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set
`forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction
`under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`Case IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Garland Stephens
`Anne Cappella
`Justin Constant
`William Ansley
`Melissa Hotze
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
`garland.stephens@weil.com
`anne.cappella@weil.com
`justin.constant@weil.com
`sutton.ansley@weil.com
`melissa.hotze@weil.com
`
`David Xue
`RIMON PC
`david.xue@rimonlaw.com
`
`Brady Cox
`ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`brady.cox@alston.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Jim Glass
`Joseph Paunovich
`Brian Mack
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`joepaunovich@quinnemanuel.com
`brianmack@quinnemanuel.com
`
`4
`
`
`
`
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
