`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ORCKIT CORPORATION
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2024-00895
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111
`
`____________
`
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF KEN. K. FUNG
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00895
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111
`
`Juniper Networks, Inc. (“Petitioner”) respectfully requests that the Board
`
`recognize Mr. Ken K. Fung as counsel pro hac vice during this proceeding.
`
`Petitioner files this Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice in accordance with
`
`the Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner
`
`Preliminary Response dated June 13, 2024 in IPR2024-00895, and in accordance
`
`with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and the Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission in IPR2013-00639, Paper 7.
`
`The conditions for Mr. Fung’s pro hac vice admission exist here.1 Lead
`
`Counsel for Petitioner (Kyle K. Tsui, Reg. No. 62,602) is registered to practice
`
`before the Board.2 And good cause exists to permit Mr. Fung’s admission pro hac
`
`vice for this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Fung has practiced law since 2011 with extensive experience litigating
`
`patent infringement cases in many jurisdictions, including district courts across
`
`the country and the International Trade Commission. Among his experience in
`
`patent litigation matters, Mr. Fung has been involved in drafting briefs before
`
`district courts, including Markman briefs and hearings, performing patent validity
`
`and infringement analyses, conducting discovery investigations, managing expert
`
`
`1 See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission,” Unified Patents v. Parallel Iron, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 (P.T.A.B.
`Oct. 15, 2013).
`2 See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00895
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111
`
`witnesses, and taking and defending depositions. And the Board has previously
`
`granted similar motions for Mr. Fung to appear pro hac vice in prior inter partes
`
`review proceedings representing Petitioner.3
`
`Many of the cases Mr. Fung has litigated involved the kinds of
`
`technologies in this case. Mr. Fung is an experienced litigator with established
`
`familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding, including extensive
`
`knowledge of the prior art submitted in the instant Petition and related matters.
`
`Mr. Fung is familiar with U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111 and the issues involved in
`
`this proceeding. Petitioner Juniper Networks, Inc. has requested Mr. Fung
`
`represent it in this proceeding.
`
`An affidavit (Ex. 1020) from Mr. Fung accompanies this Motion.4
`
`Petitioner therefore respectfully requests that the Board recognize Mr. Fung as
`
`counsel pro hac vice during this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/Kyle K. Tsui/
` Kyle K. Tsui
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`3 Juniper Networks, Inc. v. Swarm Technology LLC, IPR2021-01445, Paper 47
`(P.T.A.B. Dec. 7. 2022); Juniper Networks, Inc. v. Swarm Technology LLC,
`IPR2022-00141, Paper 30 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 19, 2023); Juniper Networks, Inc. v.
`Smart Path Connections, LLC, IPR2022-00240, Paper 17 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 11,
`2022).
`4 If the Board grants the present motion, Petitioner will file an updated power of
`attorney and mandatory notice as needed.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00895
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit
`
`Description
`
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111 to Barsheshet et al.
`
`1002
`
`File History of U.S. 10,652,111
`
`1003 Declaration of Nader F. Mir
`
`1004
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Nader F. Mir
`
`1005 U.S. Patent No. 10,097,452 B2 to Lefebvre et al.
`
`1006 U.S. Patent No. 9,264,301 B1 to Chua et al.
`
`1007 U.S. Patent No. 9,813,447 B2 to Rash et al.
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`Design and Evaluation of Deep Packet Inspection System: A Case
`Study, by Liao et al. (2011)
`
`Toward the Accurate Identification of Network Applications, by
`Moore and Papagiannaki
`
`RFC 1010, Requirements for Separation of IP Control and
`Forwarding
`
`1011 A Survey on Software-Defined Networking, by Xia et al. (2015)
`
`1012
`
`RFC 3746, Forwarding and Control Element Separation Framework
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`OpenFlow: Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks, by McKeown
`et al. (2008)
`
`Going With the Flow: Google’s Secret Switch to the Next Wave of
`Networking, by Levy (2012)
`
`RFC 793, Transmission Control Protocol
`
`1016 Open Networking Foundation - Mission
`
`1017 Open Networking Foundation - Specifications
`
`1018 Open Flow Switch Specification (Version 1.4.0)
`
`1019
`
`RFC 5810, Forwarding and Control Element Separation Protocol
`Specification
`
`1020 Affidavit of Ken K. Fung
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2024-00895
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,111
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR PRO
`
`HAC VICE ADMISSION OF KEN K. FUNG and accompanying exhibit were
`
`served via electronic mail to the following attorneys of record for Patent Owner:
`
`
`James T. Carmichael
`Stephen McBride
`Minghui Yang
`CARMICHAEL IP, PLLC
`8607 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 270
`Tysons, VA 22182
`jim@carmichaelip.com; stevemcbride@carmichaelip.com;
`mitch@carmichaelip.com; Orckit-IPRs@carmichaelip.com
`
`
`Dated: June 14, 2024
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Kyle K. Tsui/
`Kyle K. Tsui (Reg. No. 62,602)
`FISCH SIGLER LLP
`5301 Wisconsin Avenue NW
`Suite 400
`Washington, DC 20015
`Phone: 202.362.3527
`Email: kyle.tsui@fischllp.com
`
`
`
`
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
