`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`_____________________
`
`PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CPC PATENT TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`_____________________
`
`CASE: IPR2022-00602
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,665,705
`_____________________
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF JONAH HEEMSTRA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`IPR2022-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,665,705
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10, Patent Owner CPC Patent Technologies PTY
`
`Ltd. (“CPC” or “Patent Owner”), respectfully requests that the Board recognize
`
`Jonah Heemstra as counsel pro hac vice during this proceeding.
`
`II.
`
`
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS SHOWING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE
`BOARD TO RECOGNIZE COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE DURING THE
`PROCEEDING
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may recognize counsel
`
`pro hac vice during a proceeding, subject to the conditions set forth therein, and any
`
`others that the Board may impose. Patent Owner sets forth the following facts in
`
`support of this motion:
`
`1.
`
`Patent Owner’s lead counsel, Darlene F. Ghavimi-Alagha (Reg. No.
`
`72,631) is a registered practitioner before the Board.
`
`2. Mr. Heemstra is an intellectual property litigation attorney at K&L
`
`Gates LLP and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this proceeding. Mr. Heemstra has gained experience
`
`conducting technical infringement and validity analyses, briefing claim
`
`construction issues, and preparing for Markman hearings. (Ex. 2010, ¶
`
`1).
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,665,705
`
`3. Mr. Heemstra is a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of
`
`Illinois. (Id., ¶ 2). He is also admitted to practice before the District
`
`Courts for the Northern and Central Districts of Illinois. (Id.).
`
`4. Mr. Heemstra has never been suspended or disbarred from practice
`
`before any court or administrative body. (Id., ¶ 3). Mr. Heemstra has
`
`never had an application for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body denied. (Id., ¶ 4). Nor has any court or
`
`administrative body imposed sanctions or contempt citations against
`
`him. (Id.).
`
`5. Mr. Heemstra has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in
`
`part 42 of 37 C.F.R. (Id., ¶ 5).
`
`6. Mr. Heemstra agrees to be subject to the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office’s 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). (Id., ¶ 6).
`
`7. Mr. Heemstra has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue
`
`in this proceeding through participation in the district court action
`
`captioned CPC Patent Technologies PTY Ltd. v. Apple Inc., Case No.
`
`6:21-cv-00165-ADA (W.D. Tex.), which involves U.S. Patent No.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,665,705
`
`9,665,705. Mr. Heemstra is familiar with the subject patent and all prior
`
`art references and alleged grounds of invalidity relied upon by
`
`Petitioner in this proceeding. (Id., ¶ 8).
`
`III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`MR. HEEMSTRA IN THIS PROCEEDING
`The Board may recognize counsel pro hac vice upon a showing of good cause,
`
`
`
`subject to the condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner and to any other
`
`conditions as the Board may impose. 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`
`
`The facts outlined above in the Statement of Facts, and contained in the
`
`Declaration of Jonah Heemstra (Ex. 2010), establish that there is good cause to admit
`
`Mr. Heemstra pro hac vice in this proceeding. Patent Owner’s lead counsel, Darlene
`
`Ghavimi-Alagha, is a registered practitioner. Mr. Heemstra is familiar with the
`
`subject matter in this proceeding and is actively involved with the strategy and fact
`
`development in this matter.
`
`
`
`Therefore, Patent Owner respectfully submits that there is good cause for the
`
`Board to recognize Mr. Heemstra as counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`IV. NO OPPOSITION TO MOTION
`
`
`
`Patent Owner has confirmed with Petitioner that Petitioner does not oppose
`
`the present motion.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`
`IPR2022-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,665,705
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`admit Mr. Heemstra pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 31, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Darlene F. Ghavimi-Alagha/
`Darlene F. Ghavimi-Alagha
`Reg. No. 72,631
`K&L Gates LLP
`2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 650
`Austin, TX 78746
`Darlene.Ghavimi@klgates.com
`T: (512) 482-6919
`F: (512) 482-6859
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,665,705
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
` hereby certify that on October 31, 2022, I caused a true and correct copy of
`
` I
`
`the foregoing to be served on the following counsel of record for Petitioner by
`
`electronic mail to the following addresses:
`
`Jennifer C. Bailey
`Adam P. Seitz
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`7015 College Blvd., Suite 700
`Overland Park, Kansas 66211
`Telephone: (913) 777-5600
`Fax: (913) 777-5601
`Email: Jennifer.Bailey@eriseip.com
`Email: Adam.Seitz@eriseip.com
`Email: PTAB@eriseip.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`/Darlene F. Ghavimi-Alagha/
`Darlene F. Ghavimi-Alagha
`Reg. No. 72,631
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
