`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NETFLIX, INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CONVERGENT MEDIA SOLUTIONS LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-01812
`Patent 8,640,183 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`MATTHEW C. BERNSTEIN UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-01812
`Petitioner's Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`Petitioner Netflix, Inc. (“Petitioner”) respectfully request that the Board
`
`
`
`admit Matthew C. Bernstein as backup counsel pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`Mr. Bernstein is an experienced litigation attorney and has substantial knowledge
`
`in the substantive issues of the invalidity of the challenged claims of the Patent in
`
`this proceeding. Therefore, Mr. Bernstein meets the requirements of “an
`
`experienced litigating attorney and has an established familiarity with the subject
`
`matter at issue in the proceeding” under 37 C.F.R. §42.10(c).
`
`1. Time For Filing
`
`
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission has been authorized by the Notice
`
`of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time for Filing Patent Owner Preliminary
`
`Response that was mailed on September 28, 2016 (Paper 3). This Motion is filed
`
`no sooner than twenty one (21) days after service of the petition.
`
`2.
`
`Statement of Facts
`
`
`
`In this proceeding, lead counsel for Petitioner is Chun M. Ng, a registered
`
`practitioner. The following statement of facts shows that there is good cause for
`
`the Board to admit Mr. Bernstein pro hac vice.
`
`
`
`Mr. Bernstein is a patent litigation attorney with more than 18 years of
`
`experience representing clients in cases involving cases involving computer
`
`hardware and software, semiconductors, Internet and e-commerce, hand held
`
`1
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-01812
`Petitioner's Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`computers, and other mobile devices. (Affidavit of Matthew C. Bernstein
`
`(“Bernstein Affidavit”), ¶ 8 in Exhibit 1039.)
`
`
`
`Mr. Bernstein regularly litigates patent cases in various forums including the
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, various federal district
`
`courts, and the International Trade Commission (Id.) He has experience
`
`representing clients in many phases of litigation including discovery, Markman
`
`hearings, jury trials, and appeals. (Id.) Mr. Bernstein’s biography is attached to
`
`the Bernstein Affidavit (Exhibit 1039) as Appendix A.
`
`
`
`Mr. Bernstein has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue
`
`in this proceeding, having represented Petitioner as lead counsel in court
`
`proceedings against Patent Owner involving the same technology (Convergent
`
`Media Solutions, LLC v. AT&T, Inc., 3:15-cv-2156-M (N.D. Tex.)).
`
`
`
`Mr. Bernstein is familiar with the technologies and issued claims in the
`
`8,527,640; 8,640,183; 8,689,273; 8,850,507; 8,893,212 and 8,914,840 Patents.
`
`Mr. Bernstein is also familiar with the prior art references cited in PTAB Case
`
`Nos. IPR2016-01761 - 01762 and IPR2016-01811 - 01814 and the associated
`
`invalidity grounds before the PTAB.
`
`2
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-01812
`Petitioner's Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`3. Affidavit or Declaration of Individual Seeking to Appear
`
`
`
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is accompanied by an Affidavit of
`
`Mr. Bernstein (Exhibit 1039), which attests to the requirements for pro hac vice
`
`admission set forth in IPR2013-00639, Paper 7, dated Oct. 15, 2013.
`
`4. Conclusion
`
`
`
`Accordingly, Petitioner submits that there is good cause under 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.10(c) for the Board to admit Matthew C. Bernstein as counsel pro hac vice
`
`and to authorize Mr. Bernstein to represent Petitioner as back-up counsel in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /Chun M. Ng/
`Lead Counsel
`Chun M. Ng, Reg. No. 36,878
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Matthew C. Bernstein, Pro Hac Vice
`Patrick J. McKeever, Reg. No. 66,019
`Vinay P. Sathe, Reg. No. 55,595
`Miguel J. Bombach, Reg. No. 68,636
`Kevin E. Kantharia, Reg. No. 71,071
`
`Attorneys for Netflix, Inc.
`
`
`3
`
`Dated: March 1, 2017
`
`
`
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`(858) 720-5700
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PTAB Case No. IPR2016-01812
`Petitioner's Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that true copies of the foregoing
`
`PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION UNDER 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.10(c) and EXHIBIT 1039 were served in their entirety this 1st day of
`
`March, 2017 by electronic mail on the Patent Owner via its attorneys of record:
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`Matthew C. Juren
`Registration No. 68,233
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`3131 W. 7th Street, Suite 300
`Fort Worth, Texas 76107
`Telephone: (817) 806-3816
`Email: matthew@nelbum.com
`
`CMS-IPR@nelbum.com
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Barry J. Bumgardner
`Registration No. 38,397
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`3131 W. 7th Street, Suite 300
`Fort Worth, Texas 76107
`Telephone: (817) 377-3494
`Email: barry@nelbum.com
`
`
`
`Dated: March 1, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /Chun M. Ng/
`Lead Counsel
`Chun M. Ng, Reg. No. 36,878
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Matthew C. Bernstein, Pro Hac Vice
`Patrick J. McKeever, Reg. No. 66,019
`Vinay P. Sathe, Reg. No. 55,595
`Miguel J. Bombach, Reg. No. 68,636
`Kevin E. Kantharia, Reg. No. 71,071
`
`Attorneys for Netflix, Inc.
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`11988 El Camino Real, Suite 350
`San Diego, CA 92130
`(858) 720-5700
`
`
`
`
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
