`571.272.7822
`
`
` Entered: November 13, 2019
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC., INSTAGRAM, LLC, AND WHATSAPP INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BLACKBERRY LIMITED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019-009251
`Patent 8,209,634 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MIRIAM L. QUINN, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`ROBERT L. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`QUINN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mark R. Weinstein
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 Snap Inc. filed a petition and a motion for joinder in IPR2019-00938, both
`of which have been granted. Paper 17. Therefore, Snap Inc. has been joined
`as a petitioner. Id.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00925
`Patent 8,209,634 B2
`
`
`Facebook, Inc., Instagram, LLC, and WhatsApp Inc. (collectively
`
`“Petitioner”) filed a Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Mark R. Weinstein in the above-captioned proceeding. Paper 18 (“Motion”
`
`or “Mot.”). Petitioner also filed a Declaration of Mr. Weinstein in support
`
`of the Motion. Ex. 1127. Patent Owner has not filed an opposition to the
`
`Motion.
`
`We have reviewed the Motion and the accompanying Declaration of
`
`Mr. Weinstein. The Motion states that there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize Mr. Weinstein as counsel pro hac vice because Mr. Weinstein is
`
`an experienced litigation attorney who has been involved in numerous
`
`complex litigations in state and federal courts, and because Mr. Weinstein
`
`has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding.
`
`Mot. 1–2; see also Ex. 1127 ¶ 8. Based on the facts stated in the Motion and
`
`averred in the Declaration, we conclude that Mr. Weinstein has sufficient
`
`qualifications to represent Petitioner in these proceedings. The Motion is
`
`hereby granted, and Mr. Weinstein will be permitted to appear pro hac vice
`
`in these proceedings as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00925
`Patent 8,209,634 B2
`
`It is
`
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Mr. Mark R. Weinstein in the instant proceeding is granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weinstein will be authorized to
`
`represent Petitioner as back-up counsel in the instant proceeding only;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in the instant proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weinstein is to 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 August 2018 Update,
`
`83 Federal Register 39,989 (Aug. 13, 2018), 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. Weinstein is subject to the USPTO
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and
`
`the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00925
`Patent 8,209,634 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Heidi Keefe
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`
`Andrew Mace
`amace@cooley.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Michael T. Hawkins
`hawkins@fr.com
`
`Sam Stake
`samstake@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Craig A. Deutsch
`deutsch@fr.com
`
`Kim Leung
`leung@fr.com
`
`Nicholas Stephens
`nstephens@fr.com
`
`Kenneth W. Darby
`kdarby@fr.com
`
`James M. Glass
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Ogi Zivojnovic
`ogizivojnovic@quinnemaneul.com
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
