`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2022-01222
`Patent 8,982,863 B1
`_______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF GREER N. SHAW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Smart Mobile Technologies LLC (“Patent Owner”)
`
`respectfully requests that the Board recognize Greer N. Shaw, Esq. as pro hac vice
`
`and backup counsel for Patent Owner for this proceeding.
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is being filed pursuant
`
`to and in compliance with the Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time
`
`for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary Response, which was filed August 4, 2022
`
`(Paper 3) (the “Notice”). The Notice authorizes parties to file motions for pro hac
`
`vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Further to the Notice, such “motions
`
`shall be filed in accordance with the ‘Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac
`
`Vice Admission’ in Case IPR2013-00639, Paper 7” (the “Order”).
`
`II. TIMING OF FILING
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice admission is being filed in accordance with
`
`the Notice Authorizing the Filing of a Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission, and is
`
`filed greater than twenty-one days after that Notice.
`
`III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`As required by the Order, the following statement of facts, supported by the
`
`attached Declaration of Greer N. Shaw in Support of Patent Owner’s Unopposed
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission (Ex. 2002), shows that there is good cause for
`
`the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) to recognize Mr. Shaw pro hac vice
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Shaw has more than twenty-five years of experience specializing in
`
`patent litigation and representing clients in patent litigation matters in various
`
`United States District Courts and the United States Court of Appeals for the
`
`Federal Circuit. (Ex. 2002 at ¶ 2.)
`
`Mr. Shaw is a member in good standing of the State Bar of California, the
`
`State bar of Arizona, and the Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Id. at ¶
`
`1). Mr. Shaw is admitted to practice before the United States District Court for the
`
`Eastern District of Texas, the District of Nebraska, the District of Massachusetts,
`
`the District of Arizona, and the Southern, Eastern, Northern, and Central Districts
`
`of California. Mr. Shaw is also admitted to practice before the United States Courts
`
`of Appeals for the First, Ninth and Federal Circuits. (Id. at ¶ 2)
`
`Mr. Shaw has worked with lead counsel in all aspects of his participation in
`
`this proceeding. Mr. Shaw has an established deep familiarity with the subject
`
`matter at issue in this proceeding. (Id. at ¶ 10.) Mr. Shaw has reviewed U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,982,863 (the “’863 patent”), the patent-at-issue, and other papers associated
`
`with this matter. (Id.) Mr. Shaw is counsel for Patent Owner in the related co-
`
`pending district court case Smart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., 6:21-cv-
`
`00603-ADA (W.D. Tex.), in which Patent Owner has asserted the ’863 patent
`
`against Petitioner. (Id.)
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Mr. Shaw has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any
`
`court or administrative body, apart from an administrative suspension for
`
`nonpayment of inactive bar dues by the Washington Bar Association, which was
`
`lifted upon payment of the overdue bar dues. (Id. at ¶ 3.) Mr. Shaw has never had
`
`an application for admission to practice before any court or administrative body
`
`denied. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Mr. Shaw has never had any sanctions or contempt citations
`
`imposed on from any court or administrative body. (Id. at ¶ 5.)
`
`Mr. Shaw 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 title 37 of
`
`the Code of Federal Regulations. (Id. at ¶ 6.) Mr. Shaw agrees to be subject to the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office 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. at ¶ 7.) Mr. Shaw has applied to appear pro hac vice in five other
`
`proceedings before the Board within the last three years. (Id. at ¶ 8.)
`
`IV. REASONS FOR GRANTING THE MOTION
`
`The Board 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 and to any other conditions as the Board may impose.” 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.10(c). For example, where the lead counsel is a registered practitioner, a motion
`
`to appear pro hac vice may be granted upon showing that counsel who is seeking
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`pro hac vice admission is “an experienced litigating attorney and has an
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.” (Id.) The
`
`motion for pro hac vice admission must contain a statement of facts showing good
`
`cause and be accompanied by a declaration of the individual who is seeking
`
`admission. See Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper
`
`No. 7 at 3-4 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 15, 2013). The declaration in turn must contain certain
`
`attestations. (Id.)
`
`This motion and the accompanying declaration meet all of the Board’s
`
`requirements. The lead counsel in this proceeding, Rex Hwang, is a registered
`
`practitioner. (Id. at ¶ 9.) Mr. Shaw is an experienced litigating attorney and has an
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding. (Id. at ¶¶
`
`2, 10.) Mr. Shaw’s declaration makes the necessary attestations. (Id. at ¶ 11.)
`
`Petitioner does not oppose this motion.
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner respectfully submits that there is
`
`good cause for the Board to recognize Mr. Shaw as Pro Hac Vice counsel and
`
`backup counsel for Patent Owner during this proceeding. Patent Owner’s Motion
`
`for Pro Hac Vice Admission is accompanied by a Declaration of Greer N. Shaw as
`
`required by the Order.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Dated: December 2, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Rex Hwang/
`Rex Hwang (Reg. No. 56,206)
`SKIERMONT DERBY LLP
`633 West 5th Street, Suite 5800
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`P: 213-788-4500/F: 213-788-4545
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Todd Martin (Reg. No. 78,642)
`SKIERMONT DERBY LLP
`1601 Elm Street, Suite 4400
`Dallas, TX 75201
`P: 214-978-6600/F: 214-978-6601
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Philip J. Graves
`(pro hac vice application submitted)
`Greer N. Shaw
`(pro hac vice application submitted)
`GRAVES & SHAW LLP
`355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 2450
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Tel: (213) 214-5101
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing Unopposed
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Greer N. Shaw and accompanying
`
`declaration was served on December 2, 2022, by delivering a copy via electronic
`
`mail to the attorneys of record for the Petitioner as follows:
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Adam C. Fowles
`adam.fowles.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Samuel Drezdzon
`samuel.drezdzon.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`Dated: December 2, 2022
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Rex Hwang/
`Rex Hwang (Reg. No. 56,206)
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`