throbber
Paper 11
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822 Entered: September 22, 2021
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`PLAYTIKA LTD. and PLAYTIKA HOLDING CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NEXRF CORP.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-00951 (Patent 8,747,229 B2)
`IPR2021-00952 (Patent 8,506,406 B2)
`IPR2021-00953 (Patent 9,646,454 B1)
`__________
`
`
`Before LYNNE H. BROWNE, TIMOTHY J. GOODSON, and
`TIMOTHY G. MAJORS, Administrative Patent Judges.1
`
`BROWNE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Christopher Gosselin
`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. The proceedings have not been
`consolidated, and the Parties are not authorized to use this style heading in
`any subsequent papers.
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00951 (Patent 8,747,229 B2)
`IPR2021-00952 (Patent 8,506,406 B2)
`IPR2021-00953 (Patent 9,646,454 B1)
`
`
`NexRF Corp. (“Patent Owner”) filed Motions for admission of
`Christopher Gosselin pro hac vice in each of the above-captioned
`proceedings. Paper 9 (“Mot.”, “Motion”). 2 Petitioner has not opposed the
`Motions. 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”).
`Patent Owner states that there is good cause for the Board to
`recognize Christopher Gosselin pro hac vice during these proceedings
`because he (1) “is an experienced litigator with more than a decade of
`experience representing clients in patent litigation matters related to
`software, electrical, mechanical, and electro-mechanical arts”; (2) “is very
`familiar with the challenged patent, as well as the legal subject matter,
`technical subject matter, and prior art discussed in the Petition”; (3) “has
`personally reviewed the prosecution history, the prior art discussed in the
`Petition, and the declaration and exhibits accompanying the Petition”; and
`(4) “has been and continues to be actively involved with preparing
`
`2 We cite to Papers and Exhibits in IPR2021-00951. Similar items were
`filed in IPR2021-00952 and IPR2021-00953.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00951 (Patent 8,747,229 B2)
`IPR2021-00952 (Patent 8,506,406 B2)
`IPR2021-00953 (Patent 9,646,454 B1)
`
`submissions in this matter, with the strategic, factual, and technical aspects
`of this matter, and in counseling, and coordinating with Patent Owner.”
`Mot. 5–6. Patent Owner also states that it “has a substantial need for Mr.
`Gosselin’s pro hac vice admission and his involvement in the continued
`prosecution of this proceeding” “[i]n view of Mr. Gosselin’s extensive
`knowledge of the subject matter of this proceeding.” Id. at 6.
`The Motions are supported by Declarations of Mr. Gosselin
`(Ex. 2007, “Decl.”) that attest to the statements above and comply with the
`requirements set forth in the Notice. See Decl. ¶¶ 1–10.
`Upon consideration, Patent Owner has demonstrated that Mr. Gosselin
`has sufficient legal and technical qualifications and familiarity with the
`subject matter at issue, and that there is a need for Patent Owner to have
`counsel with his experience. See, e.g., id. ¶¶ 1–3; Mot. 5–6. Patent Owner
`therefore has established good cause for admitting Mr. Gosselin
`pro hac vice in each of the above-captioned proceedings.
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motions for admission pro hac vice
`of Christopher Gosselin in the above-captioned proceedings are granted;
`Mr. Gosselin is authorized to act as back-up counsel in these proceedings
`only;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Gosselin shall comply with the
`Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code
`of Federal Regulations; and
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00951 (Patent 8,747,229 B2)
`IPR2021-00952 (Patent 8,506,406 B2)
`IPR2021-00953 (Patent 9,646,454 B1)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Gosselin 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.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2021-00951 (Patent 8,747,229 B2)
`IPR2021-00952 (Patent 8,506,406 B2)
`IPR2021-00953 (Patent 9,646,454 B1)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Cory Bell
`Gerson Panitch
`Forrest Jones
`Christina Ji-Hye Yang
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`cory.bell@finnegan.com
`gerson.panitch@finnegan.com
`forrest.jones@finnegan.com
`christina.yang@finnegan.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Eugene LeDonne
`Brian Murphy
`Jonathan Herstoff
`HAUG PARTNERS LLP
`eledonne@haugpartners.com
`bmurphy@haugpartners.com
`jherstoff@flhlaw.com
`
`
`Adam Yowell
`Alastair Warr
`FISHERBROYLES
`adam.yowell@fisherbroyles.com
`alastair.warr@fisherbroyles.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