`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 35
`Entered: February 7, 2022
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`KOSS CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-00592 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`IPR2021-00600 (Patent 10,298,451 B1)1
`____________
`
`Before PATRICK R. SCANLON, DAVID C. MCKONE,
`GREGG I. ANDERSON, and NORMAN H. BEAMER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.2
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Doug Winnard
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 These cases have not been joined or consolidated. Rather, this Order
`addresses issues that are the same in the identified proceedings. We exercise
`our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each proceeding. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style heading in subsequent papers.
`2 This is not an expanded panel of the Board.
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00592 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`IPR2021-00600 (Patent 10,298,451 B1)
`
`
`Petitioner filed motions for admission pro hac vice of Doug Winnard
`(Paper 313) in each of the above-captioned proceedings (collectively,
`“Motions”). The Motions are supported by Declarations of Mr. Winnard.
`Ex. 1026 (“Declaration”). No opposition has been filed. For the following
`reasons, 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 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”)).
`Having reviewed the Motions and supporting Declarations, good
`cause exists for granting admission pro hac vice to Mr. Winnard.4 We note
`that Petitioner has not filed a Power of Attorney including Mr. Winnard in
`
`
`3 Paper and exhibit numbers refer to Proceeding IPR2021-00592.
`Corresponding papers and exhibits were filed in IPR2021-00600.
`4 We note that in the Declarations, Mr. Winnard declares that he has read
`and will comply with Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s
`Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in “Part 42 of the C.F.R.” rather than
`“Part 42 of 37 C.F.R.” Ex. 1026 ¶ 5. We deem this discrepancy as harmless
`error because Mr. Winnard declares that he agrees 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) in the following paragraph of the Declarations. Id. at
`¶ 6.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00592 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`IPR2021-00600 (Patent 10,298,451 B1)
`
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) and has not filed an updated
`Mandatory Notice identifying Mr. Winnard as back-up counsel in
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3).
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that the Motions are granted and Doug Winnard is
`authorized to represent Petitioner as back-up counsel in the above-identified
`proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that a registered practitioner will continue to
`represent Petitioner as lead counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) business days of the date
`of this Order, Petitioner shall file a Power of Attorney including
`Mr. Winnard in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b);
`FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) business days of the date
`of this Order, Petitioner shall file an updated Mandatory Notice in
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) listing Mr. Winnard as back-up
`counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Winnard shall comply with the
`USPTO’s Consolidated Trial Practice Guide (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280 (Nov. 21,
`2019)),5 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. Winnard is subject to the USPTO’s
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and to
`the USPTO’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`
`5 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00592 (Patent 10,469,934 B2)
`IPR2021-00600 (Patent 10,298,451 B1)
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`David Holt
`Joel Henry
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`
`Jennie Hartjes
`GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM LLP
`jhartjes@goldmanismail.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Mark G. Knedeisen
`Laurén S. Murray
`Brian P. Bozzo
`K&L GATES LLP
`mark.knedeisen@klgates.com
`lauren.murray@klgates.com
`brian.bozzo@klgates.com
`
`4
`
`