`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner
`
`_________________
`
`Case IPR2018-01315; IPR2018-01316
`U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`_________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`JENNIFER L. SWIZE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01315; -01316
`U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`INTRODUCTION AND PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated (“Patent Owner”) requests that the Board recognize
`
`Jennifer L. Swize as counsel pro hac vice during these two proceedings related to
`
`the same U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674. This motion was authorized in the Notice of
`
`Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary
`
`Response in each of the respective matters. Counsel for Petitioner has indicated that
`
`it does not plan to oppose Ms. Swize’s admission pro hac vice. Because this motion
`
`meets all of the Board’s requirements, Patent Owner requests that the Board grant
`
`this motion.
`
`2.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`Patent Owner has been authorized to file motions seeking admission pro hac
`
`vice under 37 C.F.R. §42.10(c). Patent Owner’s lead counsel and back-up counsel
`
`are registered practitioners. As set forth in the accompanying declaration, Ms. Swize
`
`is an attorney at Jones Day. (Swize Dec. at ¶ 2.) She is an experienced litigating
`
`attorney with more than 17 years of experience and has served as counsel in
`
`numerous patent infringement lawsuits before several district courts and before the
`
`U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, including as counsel for Patent Owner
`
`in its Federal Circuit appeal in this matter (Appeal No. 20-1558, -1559). (Id.)
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01315; -01316
`U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`Ms. Swize has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in
`
`this proceeding. (Id. at ¶ 8.) Ms. Swize has reviewed the patent-at-issue U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,063,674 (“the ’674 patent”) and other papers associated with this matter. (Id.)
`
`In addition, Ms. Swize is a member in good standing of the Bar of the District
`
`of Columbia. (Id. at ¶ 1.) She has never been suspended or disbarred from practice
`
`before any court or administrative body. (Id. at ¶ 3.) She has never had an
`
`application for admission to practice before any court or administrative body denied.
`
`(Id. at ¶ 4.) She has never had sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court
`
`or administrative body. (Id. at ¶ 5.) She 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 title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (Id. at ¶ 6.) She agrees to 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). (Id. at
`
`¶ 7.)
`
`3.
`
`REASONS FOR GRANTING THE MOTION
`
`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.” 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.10(c). For example, where the lead counsel is a registered practitioner, a motion
`
`to appear pro hac vice may be granted upon showing that counsel who is seeking
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`pro hac vice admission is “an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`
`Case IPR2018-01315; -01316
`U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`
`
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.” (Id.) The motion for
`
`pro hac vice admission must contain a statement of facts showing good cause and
`
`be accompanied by a declaration of the individual who is seeking admission. See
`
`Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper No. 7 at 3-4
`
`(PTAB, Oct. 15, 2013). The declaration in turn must contain certain attestations.
`
`(Id.)
`
`This motion and the accompanying declaration meet all of the Board’s
`
`requirements. The lead counsel in this proceeding, Joseph Sauer, is a registered
`
`practitioner. Ms. Swize is an experienced litigating attorney and has an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding. (See Swize Dec. at
`
`¶¶ 2, 8.) Ms. Swize’s declaration makes the necessary attestations. (Id. at ¶ 10.)
`
`4.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner submits that there is good cause for
`
`the Board to recognize Ms. Swize as counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Date: September 20, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: / Matthew W. Johnson /
`Matthew W. Johnson
`JONES DAY
`500 Grant Street, Suite 4500
`Pittsburgh, PA 15219
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01315; -01316
`U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing pro hac motion for
`
`Jennifer L. Swize and its accompanying declaration was served via email on the date
`
`below, upon the following:
`
`W. Karl Renner (IPR39521-0053IP2@fr.com)
`Thomas A. Rozylowicz (PTABInbound@fr.com)
`Whitney A. Reichel (wreichel@fr.com)
`riffe@fr.com
`holt2@fr.com
`
`
`September 20, 2022
`
`
`/ Matthew W. Johnson /
`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
