`571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 41
`Entered: July 5, 2024
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. AND JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`ORCKIT CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2023-00401 (Patent 7,545,740 B2)
`IPR2023-00402 (Patent 8,830,821 B2)
` IPR2023-00554 (Patent 10,652,111 B2)1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KRISTEN L. DROESCH, NATHAN A. ENGELS, and
`BRENT M. DOUGAL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`DOUGAL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Petitioner’s Motions for
`Admission Pro Hac Vice of Ken K. Fung
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 Juniper Networks, Inc. filed motions for joinder and petitions in IPR2024-
`00026, IPR2024-00034, and IPR2024-00037, which were granted.
`Accordingly, Juniper Networks, Inc has been joined as a petitioner in these
`proceedings. This Order addresses issues that are identical in each of the
`above-identified cases. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to issue one
`order to be filed in each case. The parties, however, are not authorized to
`use this style heading in any subsequent papers without prior authorization.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00401 (Patent 7,545,740 B2)
`IPR2023-00402 (Patent 8,830,821 B2)
`IPR2023-00554 (Patent 10,652,111 B2)
`
`
`On June 14, 2024, Petitioner Juniper Networks filed motions for pro
`hac vice Admission of Ken K. Fung in each of the above-identified
`proceedings. IPR2024-00026, Paper 8 (collectively “Motions”).2 The
`Motion in each case is supported by a Declaration of Mr. Fung. IPR2024-
`00026, Exhibit 1025 (collectively “Declarations”). Petitioner Juniper
`Networks indicates that “counsel for Patent Owner doesn’t oppose Mr. Fung
`appearing pro hac vice during this proceeding.” Motions, 2.
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we may recognize counsel
`pro hac vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. 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 Motions and the accompanying
`Declarations, we conclude that Mr. Fung has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Petitioner Juniper Networks in these proceedings,
`has demonstrated sufficient litigation experience and familiarity with the
`subject matter of these proceedings, and meets all other requirements for
`admission pro hac vice. See Declarations ¶¶ 1–9. Accordingly, Petitioner
`Juniper Networks has established good cause for pro hac vice admission of
`Mr. Fung.
`
`
`2 For expediency, we refer to Paper and Exhibit numbers filed in IPR2024-
`00026. Similar Papers and Exhibits were filed in IPR2024-00034 and
`IPR2024-00037.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00401 (Patent 7,545,740 B2)
`IPR2023-00402 (Patent 8,830,821 B2)
`IPR2023-00554 (Patent 10,652,111 B2)
`
`
`
`Upon review of the record before us, we note that a Power of Attorney
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) has not been submitted for Mr.
`Fung in any of these proceedings. In view thereof, and for the reasons set
`forth below, the Motions are conditionally granted, and will become
`effective only after Petitioner Juniper Networks files the aforementioned
`Power of Attorney.
`
`It is, therefore,
`ORDERED that Petitioner Juniper Networks’ Motions (IPR2024-
`00026, Paper 8; IPR2024-00034, Paper 8; and IPR2024-00037, Paper 9) for
`pro hac vice admission of Ken K. Fung are conditionally granted, provided
`that within ten (10) business days of the date of this order, Petitioner Juniper
`Networks must submit a Power of Attorney for Mr. Fung in accordance with
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) in each of these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner Juniper Networks must file
`updated mandatory notices identifying Mr. Fung as back-up counsel in
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) in each of these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Fung will be authorized to act only
`as back-up counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Fung shall comply with the
`Consolidated Trial Practice Guide3 (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280 (Nov. 21, 2019)),
`
`
`3 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00401 (Patent 7,545,740 B2)
`IPR2023-00402 (Patent 8,830,821 B2)
`IPR2023-00554 (Patent 10,652,111 B2)
`
`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 Mr. Fung shall be 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00401 (Patent 7,545,740 B2)
`IPR2023-00402 (Patent 8,830,821 B2)
`IPR2023-00554 (Patent 10,652,111 B2)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`Theodore Foster
`David McCombs
`Gregory Huh
`Calmann Clements
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLLP
`Ipr.theo.foster@haynesboone.com
`David.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Gregory.huh.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Calmann.clements.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`Kyle Tsui
`Andrew Ramos
`Kyle.tsui@fischllp.com
`Andrew.ramos@fischllp.com
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`James T. Carmichael
`Stephen McBride
`jim@carmichaelip.com
`stevemcbride@carmichaelip.com
`
`5
`
`