Filed: December 2, 2022
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and APPLE INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2022-01249
`Patent 9,019,946 B1
`_______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF PHILIP J. GRAVES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and APPLE INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2022-01249
`Patent 9,019,946 B1
`_______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE
`ADMISSION OF PHILIP J. GRAVES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Smart Mobile Technologies LLC (“Patent Owner”)
`
`respectfully requests that the Board recognize Philip J. Graves, 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 July 26, 2022
`
`(Paper 4) (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 Philip J. Graves in Support of Patent Owner’s Unopposed
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission (Ex. 2016), shows that there is good cause for
`
`the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) to recognize Mr. Graves pro hac vice
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Graves has over 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. 2016 at ¶ 2.)
`
`Mr. Graves is a member in good standing of the State Bar of California (Id.
`
`at ¶ 1) and is admitted to practice before the United States District Courts for the
`
`Southern, Eastern, Northern, and Central Districts of California. Mr. Graves is also
`
`admitted to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for the Ninth and
`
`Federal Circuits and the United States Supreme Court. (Id. at ¶ 2)
`
`Mr. Graves has worked with lead counsel in all aspects of his participation
`
`in this proceeding. Mr. Graves has an established deep familiarity with the subject
`
`matter at issue in this proceeding. (Id. at ¶ 10.) Mr. Graves has reviewed U.S.
`
`Patent No. 9,019,946 (the “’946 patent”), the patent-at-issue, and other papers
`
`associated with this matter. (Id.) Mr. Graves is counsel for Patent Owner in the
`
`related co-pending district court cases, Smart Mobile Technologies LLC v. Apple
`
`Inc., 6:21-cv-00603-ADA (W.D. Tex.) and Smart Mobile Technologies LLC v.
`
`Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 6:21-cv-
`
`00701-ADA (W.D. Tex.), in which Patent Owner has asserted the ’946 patent
`
`against Petitioners. (Id.)
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Mr. Graves 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. Graves has never had
`
`an application for admission to practice before any court or administrative body
`
`denied. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Mr. Graves has never had any sanctions or contempt citations
`
`imposed on from any court or administrative body. (Id. at ¶ 5.)
`
`Mr. Graves 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. Graves 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. Graves 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. Graves is an experienced litigating attorney and has an
`
`established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding. (Id. at ¶¶
`
`2, 10.) Mr. Graves’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. Graves 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 Philip J. Graves
`
`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 Philip J. Graves and accompanying
`
`declaration was served on December 2, 2022, by delivering a copy via electronic
`
`mail to the attorneys of record for the Petitioners as follows:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`IPR39843-012IP1@fr.com
`Jeremy J. Monaldo
`jjm@fr.com
`Hyun Jin In
`in@fr.com
`Sangki Park
`spark@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Clint S. Wilkins
`clint.wilkins.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`Dated: December 2, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Rex Hwang/
`Rex Hwang (Reg. No. 56,206)
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
