`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: June 28, 2021
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`BOSE CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`KOSS CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-00297 (Patent 10,368,155 B2)
`IPR2021-00612 (Patent 10,206,025 B2)
`IPR2021-00680 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`
`
`__________
`
`
`Before PATRICK R. SCANLON, DAVID C. McKONE,
`GREGG I. ANDERSON, and NORMAN H. BEAMER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.1
`
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Unopposed Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Nathan R. Speed
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are identical in each of the
`above-captioned proceedings. We therefore exercise our discretion to issue
`one order to be filed in each proceeding. This is not an order from an
`expanded panel of the Board, the proceedings have not been consolidated,
`and the parties are not authorized to use this caption format.
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00297 (Patent 10,368,155 B2)
`IPR2021-00612 (Patent 10,206,025 B2)
`IPR2021-00680 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`
`
`Bose Corporation (“Petitioner”) filed a Motion for pro hac vice
`
`admission of Nathan R. Speed in each of the above-captioned proceedings.
`
`Paper 18 (“Mot.”, “Motion”).2 Petitioner states in each Motion that “Patent
`
`Owner has been consulted and has indicated it does not object to Mr. Speed
`
`being admitted pro hac vice in this proceeding.” Mot. 1. The Motions are
`
`granted.
`
`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”)) (“Notice”).
`
`Petitioner states that there is good cause for the Board to recognize
`
`Nathan R. Speed pro hac vice during these proceedings because “Mr. Speed
`
`has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in these
`
`proceedings,” “has worked on preparing and reviewing the materials
`
`submitted in this proceeding,” “has extensive patent litigation experience
`
`and is expected to use his experience to support Lead Counsel during the
`
`proceeding, including during depositions,” and “is an exerienced practitioner
`
`
`2 We cite to Papers and Exhibits in IPR2021-00297. Similar items were
`filed in IPR2021-00612 and IPR2021-00680.
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00297 (Patent 10,368,155 B2)
`IPR2021-00612 (Patent 10,206,025 B2)
`IPR2021-00680 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`
`before the Board, having applied to appear pro hac vice in more than twenty
`
`Inter Partes Reviews over the past three years.” Mot. 2.
`
`Each Motion is supported by a Declaration of Mr. Speed (Ex. 1100,
`
`“Decl.”) that attests to the statements above and comply with the
`
`requirements set forth in the Notice. See Decl. ¶¶ 1–10.
`
`Upon consideration, Petitioner has demonstrated that Mr. Speed has
`
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications and familiarity with the subject
`
`matter at issue, and that there is a need for Petitioner to have counsel with
`
`his experience. See, e.g., Ex. 1100 ¶¶ 1–2, 8–10; Mot. 1–2. Petitioner
`
`therefore has established good cause for admitting Mr. Speed pro hac vice in
`
`each of the above-captioned proceedings.
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Nathan R. Speed in the above-captioned proceedings are granted; Mr. Speed
`
`is authorized to act as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for these proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Speed shall 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. Speed is 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
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00297 (Patent 10,368,155 B2)
`IPR2021-00612 (Patent 10,206,025 B2)
`IPR2021-00680 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Michael N. Rader
`Gregory S. Nieberg
`WOLF GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C
`mrader-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`gnieberg-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Mark G. Knedeisen
`Ragae M. Ghabrial
`Michelle Weaver
`Laurén Shuttleworth Murray
`Brian P. Bozzo
`K&L GATES LLP
`mark.knedeisen@klgates.com
`ragae.ghabrial@klgates.com
`michelle.weaver@klgates.com
`lauren.murray@klgates.com
`brian.bozzo@klgates.com
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`