`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
`
`
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
