throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 13
`Entered: August 22, 2019
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`PAYPAL, INC., UPWORK GLOBAL INC., SHOPIFY, INC., SHOPIFY (USA),
`INC., STRAVA INC., VALASSIS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`RETAILMENOT, INC., and DOLLAR SHAVE CLUB, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Cases
`IPR2019-01089 (Patent 8,099,420 B2)
`IPR2019-01091 (Patent 8,099,420 B2)
`IPR2019-01092 (Patent 6,928,442 B2)
`IPR2019-01093 (Patent 7,945,544 B2)
` IPR2019-01111 (Patent 7,802,310 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Mr. Lawrence M. Hadley
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses an issue that is identical in all five cases. We, therefore,
`exercise our discretion to issue one Decision to be filed in each case. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style heading in any subsequent papers.
`
`

`

`IPR2019-01089 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01093 (Patent 7,945,544 B2)
`IPR2019-01091 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01111 (Patent 7,802,310 B2)
`IPR2019-01092 (Patent 6,928,442 B2)
`
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`Patent Owner, PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC (“PersonalWeb”),
`filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Lawrence M. Hadley in
`each of the proceedings identified above. Paper 12 (“Mot.”).2 Petitioners,
`PayPal, Inc., Upwork Global Inc., Shopify, Inc., Shopify (USA), Inc., Strava
`Inc., Valassis Communications, Inc., RetailMeNot, Inc., and Dollar Shave
`Club, Inc., did not file oppositions. For the reasons provided below,
`PersonalWeb’s Motions are granted.
`
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`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, subject to
`the condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner. The
`representative Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission requires
`a statement of facts showing there is good cause for us to recognize counsel
`pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to
`appear. See Paper 11, 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”)).
`In these proceedings, lead counsel for PersonalWeb, Mr. Joseph A.
`Rhoa, is a registered practitioner. Mot. 2; Paper 9, 17. PersonalWeb asserts
`that there is good cause for us to recognize Mr. Hadley pro hac vice in these
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the papers and exhibits filed in
`Case IPR2019-01089. Similar papers and exhibits were filed in Cases
`IPR2019-01091, IPR2019-01092, IPR2019-01093, and IPR2019-01111.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2019-01089 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01093 (Patent 7,945,544 B2)
`IPR2019-01091 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01111 (Patent 7,802,310 B2)
`IPR2019-01092 (Patent 6,928,442 B2)
`
`
`proceedings. Mot. 2–5. PersonalWeb’s assertions in this regard are
`supported by a Declaration of Mr. Hadley. Ex. 2001.
`Mr. Hadley declares that he is a member in good standing of the State
`Bar of California and that he is admitted to practice before several district
`and appellate courts. Ex. 2001 ¶¶ 2, 4. Mr. Hadley also declares that he is
`familiar with the subject matter at issue in these proceedings because he is
`lead counsel for PersonalWeb in two pending district court cases involving
`the patents at issue. Id. ¶ 6. Moreover, the facts alleged in Mr. Hadley’s
`Declaration comply with all the requirements set forth in our representative
`Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission. See Ex. 2001 ¶¶ 3, 5,
`7–12; Mot. 2–5.
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Hadley has sufficient legal and
`technical qualifications to represent PersonalWeb in these proceedings.
`Accordingly, PersonalWeb has established that there is good cause for the
`pro hac vice admission of Mr. Hadley in these proceedings.
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that PersonalWeb’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`of Mr. Lawrence M. Hadley are granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Hadley is authorized to represent
`PersonalWeb as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that PersonalWeb is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2019-01089 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01093 (Patent 7,945,544 B2)
`IPR2019-01091 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01111 (Patent 7,802,310 B2)
`IPR2019-01092 (Patent 6,928,442 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Hadley shall comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756 (Aug. 14, 2012), 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. Hadley shall be subject to the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), as well as the
`Office’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101
`et seq.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2019-01089 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01093 (Patent 7,945,544 B2)
`IPR2019-01091 (Patent 8,099,420 B2) IPR2019-01111 (Patent 7,802,310 B2)
`IPR2019-01092 (Patent 6,928,442 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONERS:
`Brent Ray
`Kourtney N. Baltzer
`Nikhil R. Krishnan
`Kirkland & Ellis LLP
`brent.ray@kirkland.com
`kourtney.baltzer@kirkland.com
`nikhil.krishnan@kirkland.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joseph A. Rhoa
`Jonathan A. Roberts
`Mark H. Henderson III
`Nixon & Vanderhye P.C.
`jar@nixonvan.com
`jr@nixonvan.com
`mhh@nixonvan.com
`lmm@nixonvan.com
`
`Lawrence M. Hadley (admitted pro hac vice)
`Glaser, Weil, Fink, Howard, Avchen & Shapiro LLP
`lhadley@glaserweil.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket