throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 16
`Entered: September 11, 2023
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ZENTIAN LIMITED,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2023-00033 (Patent 7,587,319 B2)  
`IPR2023-00034 (Patent 7,979,277 B2)  
`IPR2023-00035 (Patent 10,062,377 B2) 
`IPR2023-00036 (Patent 10,839,789 B2) 
`IPR2023-00037 (Patent 10,971,140 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, JEFFREY S. SMITH, and
`CHRISTOPHER L. OGDEN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OGDEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Petitioner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Christina Canino
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the identified proceedings. The parties are not
`authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent papers.
`
`

`

`IPR2023-00033 (Patent 7,587,319 B2)
`IPR2023-00034 (Patent 7,979,277 B2)
`IPR2023-00035 (Patent 10,062,377 B2)
`IPR2023-00036 (Patent 10,839,789 B2)
`IPR2023-00037 (Patent 10,971,140 B2)
`
`
`On August 23, 2023, Petitioner filed a motion requesting pro hac vice
`admission of Christina Canino. Paper 14 (“Motion”).2 Petitioner also
`submitted a declaration from Attorney Canino in support of the Motion.
`Ex. 1043 (“Declaration”). Petitioner attests that Patent Owner does not
`oppose the Motion. Motion 2. For the reasons provided below, the Motion
`for Attorney Canino is conditionally granted.
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), 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.
`In authorizing a motion for pro hac vice admission, the Board requires the
`moving party to provide a statement of facts showing there is good cause for
`the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice and an affidavit or declaration
`of the individual seeking to appear in the proceeding. See 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 Motion and the accompanying
`Declaration, we conclude that Attorney Canino has sufficient legal and
`technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in this proceeding, that
`Attorney Canino has demonstrated sufficient litigation experience and
`familiarity with the subject matter of this proceeding, and that Attorney
`Canino meets all other requirements for admission pro hac vice. See
`Declaration ¶¶ 1–9. Accordingly, Petitioner has established good cause for
`
`
`2 We cite to Papers and Exhibits filed in IPR2023-00033. Similar Papers and
`Exhibits were filed in IPR2023-00034, 00035, 00036, and 00037.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2023-00033 (Patent 7,587,319 B2)
`IPR2023-00034 (Patent 7,979,277 B2)
`IPR2023-00035 (Patent 10,062,377 B2)
`IPR2023-00036 (Patent 10,839,789 B2)
`IPR2023-00037 (Patent 10,971,140 B2)
`
`pro hac vice admission of Attorney Canino. They will be permitted to serve
`as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`Petitioner has not filed a Power of Attorney including Attorney
`Canino in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b). See, e.g., Paper 2. Nor has
`Petitioner filed Mandatory Notices identifying Attorney Canino as back-up
`counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3). See, e.g., Paper 1, 77.
`In view thereof, Petitioner’s Motion is conditionally granted for Attorney
`Canino, and is to be effective after Petitioner files an inclusive Power of
`Attorney and updated Mandatory Notices.
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Attorney Canino is conditionally granted provided that (i) within ten (10)
`business days of the date of this order Petitioner must submit a Power of
`Attorney for Attorney Canino in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) and
`(ii) within twenty-one (21) business days of the date of this order Petitioner
`must submit updated Mandatory Notices identifying Attorney Canino as
`back-up counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Canino is authorized to
`represent Petitioner as back-up counsel only in this proceeding;
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2023-00033 (Patent 7,587,319 B2)
`IPR2023-00034 (Patent 7,979,277 B2)
`IPR2023-00035 (Patent 10,062,377 B2)
`IPR2023-00036 (Patent 10,839,789 B2)
`IPR2023-00037 (Patent 10,971,140 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Canino complies with the
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board 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 Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Canino is 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.
`
`
`
`
`3 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2023-00033 (Patent 7,587,319 B2)
`IPR2023-00034 (Patent 7,979,277 B2)
`IPR2023-00035 (Patent 10,062,377 B2)
`IPR2023-00036 (Patent 10,839,789 B2)
`IPR2023-00037 (Patent 10,971,140 B2)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`Jennifer C. Bailey
`Adam P. Seitz
`Adam M. Sandwell
`ERISE IP, P.A.
`jennifer.bailey@eriseip.com
`adam.seitz@eriseip.com
`adam.sandwell@eriseip.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Peter C. Knops
`Kayvan B. Noroozi
`NOROOZI PC
`peter@noroozipc.com
`kayvan@noroozipc.com
`
`Katherine Rhoades
`BARTLIT BECK LLP
`katherine.rhoades@bartlitbeck.com
`
`
`
`5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket