`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 7
`Entered: July 26, 2022
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`IPR2022-00648
`Patent 9,860,044 B2
`
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before NATHAN A. ENGELS, SHARON FENICK, and
`STEPHEN E. BELISLE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ENGELS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice
`of Kayvan B. Noroozi
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00648
`Patent 9,860,044 B2
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a motion for admission pro hac vice of Kayvan B.
`Noroozi in the above-captioned proceeding (“Motion”). Paper 5. 1 Patent
`Owner represents that Petitioner does not oppose the Motion. Id. at 1. The
`Motion is supported by the Declaration of Mr. Noroozi. Ex. 2001. For the
`reasons below, Patent Owner’s Motion is granted.
`Pursuant to 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. A motion for pro
`hac vice admission must contain a statement of facts showing there is good
`cause for us to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding and be
`accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to
`appear. See Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639,
`Paper 7 at 3–4 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (representative “Order –
`Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”).
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motion and the accompanying
`Declaration, we conclude that Mr. Noroozi has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this proceeding, that Mr. Noroozi
`has demonstrated sufficient litigation experience and familiarity with the
`subject matter of this proceeding, and that Mr. Noroozi meets all other
`requirements for admission pro hac vice. See Ex. 2001 ¶¶ 1–10.
`
`
`1 The caption pages for Patent Owner’s Motion and Mr. Noroozi’s
`Declaration incorrectly identify “IPR2022-00455” instead of “IPR2022-
`00648,” the proceeding in which the documents were filed. See Paper 5;
`Ex. 2001, 1. We understand this discrepancy to be a typographical error in
`light of (a) the filing of these documents in this proceeding, and (b) the
`correct identification of this proceeding on subsequent pages of these
`documents. See Paper 5; Ex. 2001, 2–7 (including listing IPR2022-00455 in
`a list of other proceedings).
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00648
`Patent 9,860,044 B2
`
`Accordingly, Patent Owner has established good cause for pro hac vice
`admission of Mr. Noroozi.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Kayvan B. Noroozi is granted, and Mr. Noroozi is authorized to represent
`Patent Owner only as back-up counsel in this proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Noroozi shall comply with the
`updated Office Patent Trial Practice Guide2 (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 of the Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Noroozi is subject to the USPTO’s
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the USPTO’s Rules
`of Professional Conduct set forth at 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101–11.901.
`
`
`
`
`2 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00648
`Patent 9,860,044 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Adam P. Seitz
`Jennifer C. Bailey
`Paul R. Hart
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`adam.seitz@eriseip.com
`jennifer.bailey@eriseip.com
`paul.hart@eriseip.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Peter C. Knops
`Jason Wejner
`NOROOZI PC
`peter@noroozipc.com
`jason@noroozipc.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
