`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper: 81
`Entered: November 6, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BIOGEN MA INC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01403
`Patent 8,399,514 B2
`____________
`
`Before SHERIDAN K. SNEDDEN, JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, and
`JACQUELINE T. HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`SNEDDEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Michael A. Chajon and Shannon M. Bloodworth
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01403
`Patent 8,399,514 B2
`
`
`Petitioner filed a Motion for pro hac vice admission of Michael A.
`Chajon (Paper 44) (“Chajon Motion”) and Motion for pro hac vice
`admission of Shannon M. Bloodworth (Paper 52) (“Bloodworth Motion”) in
`the above-identified proceeding. Petitioner also filed a supporting
`declaration from Mr. Chajon (Exhibit 1061) and a supporting declaration
`from Ms. Bloodworth (Exhibit 1062). Petitioner states that Patent Owner
`does not oppose either Motion. Chajon Motion 1; Bloodworth Motion 1.
`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. In its notice
`authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission, the Board requires a
`statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize
`counsel pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual
`seeking to appear in this proceeding. See Paper 4, 2 (citing Unified Patents,
`Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013)
`(representative “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission”)).
`The Board has reviewed the submissions and determined that the
`requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 42.10 have been met, and that there is good
`cause to admit Mr. Chajon and Ms. Bloodworth pro hac vice.
`It is, therefore,
`ORDERED that the Motions (Papers 44, 52) are granted, and
`Mr. Chajon and Ms. Bloodworth are authorized to represent Petitioner as
`back-up counsel in the above-listed proceeding;
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01403
`Patent 8,399,514 B2
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall submit, within ten (10)
`business days of the date of this order, a Power of Attorney for Mr. Chajon
`and Ms. Bloodworth in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b);1
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Chajon and Ms. Bloodworth shall
`comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, as updated by the July
`2019 Update, 84 Federal Register 33,925 (July 16, 2019), and the Board’s
`Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of
`Federal Regulations;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Chajon and Ms. Bloodworth are
`subject to the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 11.101 et seq. and to the USPTO’s disciplinary jurisdiction under
`37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a); and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`Mr. Chajon and Ms. Bloodworth are authorized to represent Petitioner only
`as back-up counsel in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 If either Mr. Chajon or Ms. Bloodworth intends to present argument at oral
`hearing, the Power of Attorney must be submitted prior to the hearing date.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01403
`Patent 8,399,514 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Brandon White
`David L. Anstaett
`Maria A. Stubbings
`Emily J. Greb
`Courtney M. Prochnow
`Nathan K. Kelley
`white-ptab@perkinscoie.com
`BMWhite@perkinscoie.com
`DAnstaett@perkinscoie.com
`Mstubbings@perkinscoie.com
`EGreb@perkinscoie.com
`CProchnow@perkinscoie.com
`NKelley@perkinscoie.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Barbara McCurdy
`Erin Sommers
`Pier DeRoo
`Mark Feldstein
`Cora R. Holt
`Barbara.mccurdy@finnegan.com
`Mark.feldstein@finnegan.com
`Erin.sommers@finnegan.com
`Pier.deroo@finnegan.com
`cora.holt@finnegan.com
`
`
`4
`
`