`______________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________________
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`DIRECTSTREAM, LLC,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`_______________________
`
`IPR2018-01605, IPR2018-01606, and IPR2018-01607
`
`Patent No. 7,620,800
`
`______________________
`
`
`PATENT OWNER DIRECTSTREAM, LLC’S
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`G. DONALD PUCKETT UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`I. RELIEF REQUESTED
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owner, Directstream, LLC, respectfully
`
`requests the pro hac vice admission of G. Donald Puckett in these proceedings.
`
`II. GOVERNING LAWS, RULES, AND PRECEDENT
`Section 42.10(c) states as follows:
`
`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. For example, where the lead counsel is a
`registered practitioner, a motion to appear pro hac
`vice by counsel who is not a registered practitioner may
`be granted upon showing that counsel is an experienced
`litigating attorney and has an established familiarity with
`the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`As stated in the "Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission"
`
`entered in Case IPR2013-00010 (MPT) (Paper 6) ("Motorola Order"), any motion
`
`for pro hac vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) must be filed “no sooner
`
`than (21) days after service of the petition.
`
`III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
`Based on the following facts and supported by the Declaration of G. Donald
`
`Puckett (“Puckett Decl.”) submitted herewith, Directstream, LLC requests the pro
`
`hac vice admission of G. Donald Puckett in this proceeding.
`
`1. Patent Owner Directstream’s lead counsel, Alfonso Chan, is a registered
`
`practitioner (Reg. No. 45,964).
`
`2
`
`
`
`2. Mr. Puckett is Of Counsel at the law firm Janik Vinnakota LLP. Puckett Decl.
`
`at ¶ 3.
`
`3. Mr. Puckett is an experienced litigation attorney who has been litigating patent
`
`cases for approximately twenty years. Id. at ¶ 4.
`
`4. In his role as counsel for Patent Owner, Mr. Puckett has an established
`
`familiarity with all six patents asserted against Microsoft in the field of high-
`
`performance computing design (the field of technology to which they all pertain),
`
`and the prior art asserted in this proceeding. Id. at ¶ 6.
`
`5. Mr. Puckett has been practicing since 1999 and has extensive experience
`
`litigating patent infringement cases in many different district courts across the United
`
`States. Id. at ¶ 4, 5, 7. He also has developed specialized skills and experience
`
`regarding procedural issues that arise in PTAB trials, including administrative law
`
`and constitutional issues. Id. at ¶ 14.
`
`6. Mr. Puckett has been co-lead counsel in various patent infringement trials and
`
`argued multiple Markman hearings and many other patent-related hearings. Id. at ¶ 5.
`
`7. Mr. Puckett is a member in good standing of the State Bar of Texas. Id. at ¶ 7.
`
`8. Mr. Puckett has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any
`
`court or administrative body. Id. at ¶ 8.
`
`9. No application of Mr. Puckett for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body has ever been denied. Id. at ¶ 9.
`
`3
`
`
`
`10. No sanctions or contempt citations have ever been imposed against Mr.
`
`Puckett by any court or administrative body. Id. at ¶ 10.
`
`11. Mr. Puckett has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42. Id. at ¶
`
`11.
`
`12. Mr. Puckett understands that he will be subject to the USPTO Code of
`
`Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary
`
`jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a). Id. at ¶ 12.
`
`13. Mr. Puckett has appeared before the Board pro hac vice in the last several
`
`years in: (1) IPR2014-00411 and IPR2015-00065 (consolidated); (2) IPR2014-01431
`
`and IPR2014-01432 (consolidated); and (3) IPR2016-00379 and has presented oral
`
`arguments to the Board in various cases. Id. at ¶ 13.
`
`14. This motion was filed more than 21 days after service of the Petition in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`IV. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`MR. PUCKETT IN THIS PROCEEDING
`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). Patent Owner’s lead counsel, Alfonso Chan, is a registered practitioner.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Based on the facts contained herein, as supported by Mr. Puckett’s Declaration,
`
`good cause exists to admit Mr. Puckett pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Puckett is an experienced patent litigator with unique knowledge of PTAB
`
`trials and procedure, including administrative and constitutional issues.
`
`Mr. Puckett also has an established familiarity with U.S. Patent Nos. 6,076,152,
`
`6,247,110, 6,434,687, 7,225,324, 7,421,524, and 7,762,800 because of his work for
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`In view of Mr. Puckett’s extensive knowledge of this subject matter, Patent
`
`Owner, Directstream, LLC, has a substantial need for Mr. Puckett’s pro hac vice
`
`admission and his involvement in the briefing and oral arguments in this case.
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`For the foregoing reasons as well as the reasons contained in the attached
`
`declaration, Patent Owner Directstream, LLC respectfully requests admission of G.
`
`Donald Puckett as counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Dated: May 24, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
` /Alfonso Chan/
`Alfonso Chan, Reg. No. 45,964
`achan@shorechan.com
`
`
`SHORE CHAN DEPUMPO LLP
`901 Main Street, Suite 3300
`Dallas, TX 75201
`214-593-9110
`
`5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`This is to certify that I caused to be served true and correct copies of Patent
`
`Owner Directstream, LLC Motion For Pro Hac Vice Admission of G. Donald
`
`Puckett Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) on May 24, 2019 to the Petitioner at the
`
`electronic correspondence address of the Petitioners as follows:
`
`Joseph A. Micallef
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`Scott M. Border
`sborder@sidley.com
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`1501 K Street N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`Jason P. Greenhut
`jgreenhut@sidley.com
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`1 South Dearborn
`Chicago, IL 60603
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Alfonso Chan/
`Alfonso Chan
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`