`571-272-7822
`
`
`
` Paper No. 31
`
` Date Entered: June 5, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`DIRECTSTREAM, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01594 (Patent 6,434,687 B1)
`Case IPR2018-01599 (Patent 6,076,152)
`Case IPR2018-01600 (Patent 6,247,110 B1)
`Case IPR2018-01601 (Patent 7,225,324 B2)1
`Case IPR2018-01604 (Patent 7,421,524 B2)
`Case IPR2018-01605 (Patent 7,620,800 B2)2,3
`____________
`
`
`Before KALYAN K. DESHPANDE, JUSTIN T. ARBES, and
`CHRISTA P. ZADO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`DESHPANDE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Rajkumar Vinnakota
` 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 IPR2018-01602 and IPR2018-01603 have been consolidated with IPR2018-
`01601.
`2 IPR2018-01606 and IPR2018-01607 have been consolidated with IPR2018-
`01605.
`3 This Decision addresses an issue pertaining to all ten cases. Therefore, we
`exercise our discretion to issue a single Decision to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01594 (Patent 6,434,687 B1)
`IPR2018-01599 (Patent 6,076,152)
`IPR2018-01600 (Patent 6,247,110 B2)
`IPR2018-01601 (Patent 7,225,324 B2)
`IPR2018-01604 (Patent 7,421,524 B2)
`IPR2018-01605 (Patent 7,620,800 B2)
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rajkumar
`
`Vinnakota (Paper 29, “Motions”)4 as well as a supporting declaration from Mr.
`
`Vinnakota (Ex. 2045, “Declarations”) in each of the above-identified
`
`proceedings.5,6 Petitioner informed the Board via email that it does not oppose
`
`Patent Owner’s Motions.
`
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we may recognize counsel pro hac
`
`vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. In authorizing a motion
`
`for pro hac vice admission, the Board requires the moving party to provide 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
`
`the proceeding. See Paper 3, 2 (citing Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC,
`
`Case IPR2013-00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (representative “Order –
`
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”)).
`
`
`4 Our citations are to IPR2018-01594. Similar documents were filed in IPR2018-
`01599, IPR2018-01600, IPR2018-01601, IPR2016-01604, and IPR2018-01605.
`
`5 The Declarations contain a typographical error in Paragraph 6, incorrectly listing
`Patent 7,762,800 as the patent at issue, instead of Patent 7,620,800. We deem this
`to be harmless error, as the correct patent number (7,620,800) is listed on the cover
`sheet of the Declarations in the respective proceedings. See, e.g., IPR2018-01605,
`Ex. 2060 ¶ 6.
`
`6 Patent Owner inadvertently filed the Motions for the Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Rajkumar Vinnakota as Exhibits. See, e.g., IPR2018-01594, Ex. 2044. Patent
`Owner subsequently filed the Motions as papers. See Paper 29. Accordingly,
`Patent Owner’s Motions filed as Exhibits will be expunged.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01594 (Patent 6,434,687 B1)
`IPR2018-01599 (Patent 6,076,152)
`IPR2018-01600 (Patent 6,247,110 B2)
`IPR2018-01601 (Patent 7,225,324 B2)
`IPR2018-01604 (Patent 7,421,524 B2)
`IPR2018-01605 (Patent 7,620,800 B2)
`
`
`Having reviewed the Motions and supporting Declarations, good cause
`
`exists for granting admission pro hac vice to Mr. Vinnakota in the above
`
`proceedings.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motions seeking admission Pro Hac Vice
`
`for Rajkumar Vinnakota are GRANTED;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall submit, within ten (10)
`
`business days of the date of this Decision, a Power of Attorney for Mr. Vinnakota
`
`in each of the above proceedings accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall submit an updated
`
`mandatory notice identifying Mr. Vinnakota as back-up counsel in each of the
`
`above proceedings, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Vinnakota is to comply with the Board’s
`
`Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal
`
`Regulations and the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide including the August 2018
`
`update;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Vinnakota is 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);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in the above proceedings; and
`
`Mr. Vinnakota is authorized to represent Patent Owner as back-up counsel only in
`
`the proceedings; and
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01594 (Patent 6,434,687 B1)
`IPR2018-01599 (Patent 6,076,152)
`IPR2018-01600 (Patent 6,247,110 B2)
`IPR2018-01601 (Patent 7,225,324 B2)
`IPR2018-01604 (Patent 7,421,524 B2)
`IPR2018-01605 (Patent 7,620,800 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit 2044 of IPR2018-01594, Exhibit 2057
`
`of IPR2018-01599, Exhibit 2057 of IPR2018-01600, Exhibit 2060 of IPR2018-
`
`01601, Exhibit 2055 of IPR2018-01604, and Exhibit 2059 of IPR2018-01605 are
`
`expunged.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01594 (Patent 6,434,687 B1)
`IPR2018-01599 (Patent 6,076,152)
`IPR2018-01600 (Patent 6,247,110 B2)
`IPR2018-01601 (Patent 7,225,324 B2)
`IPR2018-01604 (Patent 7,421,524 B2)
`IPR2018-01605 (Patent 7,620,800 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Joseph Micallef
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`
`Jason Greenhut
`jgreenhut@sidley.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Alfonso Chan
`achan@shorechan.com
`
`Joseph DePumpo
`jdepumpo@shorechan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`