`571.272.7822 Entered: November 27, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SONY CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FUJIFILM CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00876 (Patent 6,462,905 B1)
`Case IPR2018-00877 (Patent 6,462,905 B1)1
`____________
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`SHEILA F. McSHANE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice — Katherine M. Burke
` 37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 The parties are not authorized to use this caption. The parties will continue
`to use the individual case captions.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00876 (Patent 6,462,905)
`IPR2018-00877 (Patent 6,462,905)
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`On November 10, 2018, Fuji Corporation (“Patent Owner”) moved
`for admission pro hac vice of Katherine M. Burke in IPR2018-00876 (“’876
`IPR”) and IPR2018-00877 (“’877 IPR”). Papers 16 (’876 IPR); 12 (’877
`IPR); “Motions.” Patent Owner filed a supporting declaration of Ms. Burke
`as part of the Motions. Sony Corporation (“Petitioner”) has not timely
`opposed the Motions.
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we 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
`motions for pro hac vice, we require the moving party to provide a statement
`of facts showing there is good cause for us to recognize counsel pro hac
`vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to appear in the
`proceeding.2
`Upon review of the Motions and supporting declarations, we
`determine that Patent Owner has demonstrated that Katharine Burke has
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this
`proceeding. We also recognize the need to have her involved as backup
`counsel. Accordingly, Patent Owner has established good cause for
`admitting Katharine Burke pro hac vice.
`
`
`
`
`2 The electronic signature on the declaration does not comply with our
`formatting requirements. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(a)(4); 42.11(b) (both citing
`37 C.F.R. §§ 11.18(a), 1.4(d)(2)). Petitioner does not object and future
`filings must comply with our rules.
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00876 (Patent 6,462,905)
`IPR2018-00877 (Patent 6,462,905)
`
`
`ORDER
`
`It is accordingly
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Katharine Burke are granted, and Ms. Burke is authorized to represent
`Patent Owner as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for both proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Katharine Burke is to comply with the
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for
`Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations, and to
`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.; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be filed in each
`of the ’876 and ’877 IPRs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00876 (Patent 6,462,905)
`IPR2018-00877 (Patent 6,462,905)
`
`PETITIONER:
`Richard F. Giunta
`Michael N. Rader
`Randy J. Pritzker
`WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`rgiunta-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`mrader-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`rpritzker-ptab@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Eliot D. Williams
`Robert C. Scheinfeld
`Robert L. Maier
`Jennifer Tempesta
`Margaret M. Welsh
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`eliot.williams@bakerbotts.com
`robert.scheinfeld@bakerbotts.com
`robert.maier@bakerbotts.com
`jennifer.tempesta@bakerbotts.com
`margaret.welsh@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`