`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 19
`Entered: August 19, 2022
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO.,
`ARUBA NETWORKS, LLC, and
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BillJCo, LLC.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2022-00420 (Patent 10,477,994 B2)
`IPR2022-00426 (Patent 8,761,804 B2)
`IPR2022-00427 (Patent 10,292,011 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before THU A. DANG, ROBERT J. WEINSCHENK, and GARTH D. BAER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BAER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Courtland C. Merrill
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the identified proceedings. The parties are
`not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00420 (Patent 10,477,994 B2)
`IPR2022-00426 (Patent 8,761,804 B2)
`IPR2022-00427 (Patent 10,292,011 B2)
`
`
`Patent Owner filed motions for admission pro hac vice of Courtland
`C. Merrill in the above-identified proceedings. Paper 19 (“Motion”).2
`Patent Owner also filed affidavits of Mr. Merrill in support of the motions.
`Ex. 2020 (“Affidavit”). For the reasons discussed below, the motions are
`conditionally 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, subject to
`the condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner. The
`representative Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission requires
`a statement of facts showing there is good cause for us to recognize counsel
`pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to
`appear. See Paper 5, 2 (citing Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC,
`IPR2013-00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (representative “Order –
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”)).
`Based on the facts set forth in the motions and accompanying
`affidavits, we conclude that Mr. Merrill has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Patent Owner in the above-identified proceedings,
`that Mr. Merrill has demonstrated sufficient litigation experience and
`familiarity with the subject matter of the proceedings, and that Mr. Merrill
`meets all other requirements for admission pro hac vice. Accordingly,
`Patent Owner has established good cause for admission pro hac vice of Mr.
`Merrill.
`
`
`2 We cite to Papers and Exhibits filed in IPR2022-00420. Similar Papers
`and Exhibits were filed in IPR2022-00426 and IPR2022-00427.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00420 (Patent 10,477,994 B2)
`IPR2022-00426 (Patent 8,761,804 B2)
`IPR2022-00427 (Patent 10,292,011 B2)
`
`
`Upon review of the record before us, we note that a Power of Attorney
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) has not been submitted for
`Mr. Merrill. In view thereof, and for the reasons set forth below, Patent
`Owner’s Motion is conditionally granted, to be effective after Patent Owner
`files a Power of Attorney.
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`of Courtland C. Merrill in each of the above-identified proceedings is
`conditionally granted, provided that within ten (10) business days of the date
`of this order, Patent Owner must submit a Power of Attorney for Mr. Merrill
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner must file updated
`mandatory notices identifying Mr. Merrill as back-up counsel in accordance
`with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Merrill is authorized to represent
`Patent Owner only as back-up counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in the above-identified
`proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Merrill is to comply with the
`Consolidated Trial Practice Guide3 (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280 (Nov. 21, 2019)),
`and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of
`37 C.F.R.; and
`
`3 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00420 (Patent 10,477,994 B2)
`IPR2022-00426 (Patent 8,761,804 B2)
`IPR2022-00427 (Patent 10,292,011 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Merrill shall be 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
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00420 (Patent 10,477,994 B2)
`IPR2022-00426 (Patent 8,761,804 B2)
`IPR2022-00427 (Patent 10,292,011 B2)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Elana Araj
`araje@gtlaw.com
`Andrew Sommer
`sommera@gtlaw.com
`Jeffrey Blake
`jblake@merchantgould.com
`Daniel McDonald
`dmcdonald@merchantgould.com
`Larissa Bifano
`Larissa.bifano@dlapiper.com
`Jonathan Hicks
`Jonathan.hicks@dlapiper.com
`Zachary Conrade
`Zack.conrad@dlapiper.com
`Rose Prey
`preyr@gtlaw.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Brian Michalek
`Brian.michalek@saul.com
`Joseph Kuo
`Joseph.kuo@saul.com
`Brian Landry
`Brian.landry@saul.com
`
`
`
`
`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
