`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`
`WALMART INC.; Z-SHADE CO., LTD.;
`COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION;
`LOWE’S HOME CENTERS, LLC; and
`SHELTERLOGIC CORP.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CARAVAN CANOPY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_________________
`
`Case IPR2020-01026
`Patent No. 5,944,040
`_________________
`
`DECLARATION OF KATHLEEN R. GEYER
`IN SUPPORT OF PRO HAC VICE MOTION
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`Petitioner Walmart Inc.
`Exhibit 1051 - Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`Declaration of Kathleen R. Geyer
`
`
`
`I, Kathleen R. Geyer, declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am an associate in the law firm of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton
`
`LLP, with offices located at 1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700, Seattle, WA 98101,
`
`which has been retained by Petitioner Walmart Inc. (“Walmart”), in this inter
`
`partes review proceeding. Lead counsel for Petitioner is David A. Reed, who is a
`
`partner in the law firm of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP. Mr. Reed is
`
`registered to practice before the United State Patent and Trademark Office and
`
`holds Registration No. 61,226. With respect to this proceeding, I have and will
`
`continue to work closely with Mr. Reed.
`
`2.
`
`I am an experienced litigating attorney and have an established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. In particular, I have
`
`approximately 2 years of experience as a patent litigator and have represented
`
`clients in numerous patent litigation cases in various United States District Courts
`
`and the United States International Trade Commission, including for example:
`
` Dr. Mark A. Barry v. DePuy Synthes Products Inc., et al., No. 17-cv-
`
`03003 (E.D. Pa.)
`
` Dr. Mark A. Barry v. Stryker Corp., No. 20-cv-01787-RGA (D. Del.)
`
` Dr. Mark A. Barry v. Alphatec Holdings, Inc., et al., No. 21-cv-
`
`00805-RGA (D. Del.)
`
`2
`
`
`
`Petitioner Walmart Inc.
`Exhibit 1051 - Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
` Dr. Mark A. Barry v. Orthopediatrics Corp., No. 1:20-cv-01786-RGA
`
`(D. Del.)
`
` Dr. Mark A. Barry v. SeaSpine Holdings Corp., et al., No. 21-cv-
`
`00806-RGA (D. Del.)
`
` Low Temp Industries, Inc. v. Duke Manufacturing Co., No. 4:20-cv-
`
`00686-MTS (E.D. Mo.)
`
` Nevro Corp. v. Nalu Medical, Inc., No. 20-cv-00291-CFC (D. Del.)
`
` Droplets, Inc. v. Nordstrom, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-4049-RMW (N.D. Cal.)
`
` Echologics, LLC et al. v. Orbis Intelligent Systems, Inc., et al., No.
`
`19-cv-02036-RGA (D. Del.)
`
` Caravan Canopy Int’l, Inc. v. Walmart Inc., et al., No. 2:19-cv-06978-
`
`ADS-PSG (C.D. Cal.)
`
` Prolitec Inc. v. ScentAir Technologies, LLC, No. 20-cv-00984-RGA
`
`(D. Del.)
`
` Certain Vacuum Insulated Flasks and Components Thereof, Inv. No.
`
`337-TA-1216 (USITC)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Petitioner Walmart Inc.
`Exhibit 1051 - Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`3.
`
`I have an established familiarity with U.S. Patent 5,944,040 (“the ’040
`
`patent”), the patent at issue in this proceeding, and with the legal subject matter,
`
`technical subject matter, and prior art discussed in Walmart’s request for inter
`
`partes review of the '040 patent, being counsel for Petitioner Walmart in the patent
`
`infringement civil action, Caravan Canopy Int’l, Inc. v. Walmart Inc., et al., No.
`
`2:19-cv-06978-ADS-PSG (C.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2019), where the same patent that is
`
`the subject of this inter partes review proceeding, the ’040 patent, is asserted
`
`against Walmart. Under the supervision of lead counsel, I also have been
`
`substantively involved in the preparation of Petitioner Walmart’s papers in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of State of Washington.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any
`
`court or administrative body.
`
`6.
`
`None of my applications for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body has ever been denied.
`
`7.
`
`I have never had a court or administrative body deny my application
`
`for admission to practice.
`
`8.
`
`I have never been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any court or
`
`administrative body.
`
`9.
`
`I have read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`
`
`4
`
`Petitioner Walmart Inc.
`Exhibit 1051 - Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in Part 42 of Title 37 of
`
`the Code of Federal Regulations.
`
`10.
`
`I agree to be subject to the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and
`
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`11.
`
`I have appeared in no other proceedings before the Office, including
`
`the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in the last three (3) years.
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are true and
`
`that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true, and
`
`further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful, false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Executed on September 7, 2021 at Seattle, Washington.
`
`
`
` /Kathleen R. Geyer/
`Kathleen R. Geyer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`Petitioner Walmart Inc.
`Exhibit 1051 - Page 5 of 5
`
`
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
