`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 20
`Entered: February 26, 2020
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SNAP INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BLACKBERRY LIMITED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2019-00714 (Patent 8,825,084 B2)
` IPR2019-00715 (Patent 8,326,327 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, MIRIAM L. QUINN, and
`AARON W. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice of Chad J. Peterman
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order applies to both proceedings. We exercise our discretion to
`issue one Order to be filed in each case. The parties are not authorized to
`use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00714 (Patent 8,825,084 B2)
`IPR2019-00715 (Patent 8,326,327 B2)
`
`
`On December 18, 2019, Petitioner filed motions for admission pro
`
`hac vice of Chad J. Peterman in each of the above-identified proceedings
`
`(collectively “Motions”). Paper 14.2 Petitioner also filed declarations of
`
`Mr. Peterman in support of the Motions (collectively “Declarations”).
`
`Ex. 1010.3 Patent Owner has not filed an opposition to the Motions. For the
`
`reasons provided below, Petitioner’s Motions are granted.
`
`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 3, 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”)).
`
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motions and the accompanying
`
`Declarations, we conclude that Mr. Peterman has sufficient legal and
`
`technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in these proceedings,
`
`Mr. Peterman has demonstrated sufficient familiarity with the subject matter
`
`of these proceedings, and Petitioner’s intent to be represented by counsel
`
`with litigation experience is warranted. Accordingly, Petitioner has
`
`established good cause for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Peterman.
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we cite to Papers filed in IPR2019-00714.
`Petitioner filed a similar Motion in IPR2019-00715 (Paper 15).
`3 For purposes of expediency, we cite to Exhibits filed in IPR2019-00714.
`Petitioner filed a similar Declaration in IPR2019-00715 (Ex. 1012).
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00714 (Patent 8,825,084 B2)
`IPR2019-00715 (Patent 8,326,327 B2)
`
`Mr. Peterman will be permitted to serve as back-up counsel only. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`We note that Petitioner has filed a Power of Attorney including
`
`Mr. Peterman in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b). IPR2019-00714,
`
`Paper 2; IPR2019-00715, Paper 2. Petitioner has also filed Mandatory
`
`Notices identifying Mr. Peterman as back-up counsel in accordance with
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3). IPR2019-00714, Paper 1, 1; IPR2019-00715,
`
`Paper 1, 1.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Mr. Chad J. Peterman are granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the above-identified
`
`proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Peterman is authorized to represent
`
`Petitioner only as back-up counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Peterman is to comply with the
`
`Consolidated Trial Practice Guide (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280 (Nov. 21, 2019)),
`
`and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title
`
`37, Code of Federal Regulations; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Peterman shall be subject to the
`
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the
`
`USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et.
`
`seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00714 (Patent 8,825,084 B2)
`IPR2019-00715 (Patent 8,326,327 B2)
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Yar Chaikovsk
`David Okano
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`yarchaikovsky@paulhastings.com
`davidokano@paulhastings.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Michaele T. Hawkins
`Nicholas Stephens
`Kenneth W. Darby
`Craig A. Deutsch
`Kim H. Leung
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`hawkins@fr.com
`nstephens@fr.com
`kdarby@fr.com
`deutsch@fr.com
`leung@fr.com
`
`Ognijen Zivojnovic
`Sam Stake
`Alex Wolinsky
`James M. Glass
`QUINN EMANUEL URQHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`ogizivojnovic@quinnemanuel.com
`samstake@quinnemanuel.com
`alexworlinsky@quinnemanuel.com
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`