`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
` Paper No. 23
` Entered: August 5, 2021
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NANOCO TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2021-00182 (Patent 9,680,068 B2)
`IPR2021-00183 (Patent 7,588,828 B2)
`IPR2021-00184 (Patent 7,803,423 B2)
`IPR2021-00185 (Patent 7,867,557 B2)
` IPR2021-00186 (Patent 8,524,365 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before ERICA A. FRANKLIN, GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, and
`CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Jeremy Wilson
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the above-listed proceedings. We exercise
`our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each proceeding. Unless
`otherwise authorized, the parties shall not use this heading style in any
`subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00182 (Patent 9,680,068 B2)
`IPR2021-00183 (Patent 7,588,828 B2)
`IPR2021-00184 (Patent 7,803,423 B2)
`IPR2021-00185 (Patent 7,867,557 B2)
`IPR2021-00186 (Patent 8,524,365 B2)
`
`Petitioner filed motions for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Jeremy
`
`Wilson in the above-identified proceedings (collectively, “Motions”).
`
`Paper 20.2 Petitioner also filed declarations from Mr. Wilson in support of
`
`the Motions (collectively, “Declarations”). Ex. 1025.3 Petitioner states that
`
`counsel for Patent Owner does not object to the admission pro hac vice of
`
`Mr. Wilson. Paper 20, 1.
`
`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, Case IPR2013-00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013)
`
`(Paper 7) (representative “Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission”).
`
`Lead counsel for Petitioner, Mr. F. Christopher Mizzo, a registered
`
`practitioner, filed the Motions. Paper 20, 5. In the Motions, Petitioner states
`
`there is good cause for the Board to recognize Mr. Wilson pro hac vice
`
`during these proceedings because he is an experienced litigating attorney
`
`and has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in these
`
`proceedings, as well as the parallel litigation involving the patents at issue in
`
`
`2 All citations are to IPR2021-00182. Petitioner filed similar motions in
`IPR2021-00183, IPR2021-00184, IPR2021-00185, and IPR2021-00186.
`
`3 Petitioner filed similar declarations in IPR2021-00183, IPR2021-00184,
`IPR2021-00185, and IPR2021-00186.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00182 (Patent 9,680,068 B2)
`IPR2021-00183 (Patent 7,588,828 B2)
`IPR2021-00184 (Patent 7,803,423 B2)
`IPR2021-00185 (Patent 7,867,557 B2)
`IPR2021-00186 (Patent 8,524,365 B2)
`
`these proceedings. Paper 20, 1–4. The Declaration of Mr. Wilson complies
`
`with the requirements for pro hac vice admission. Ex. 1025 ¶¶1–10; see
`
`Unified Patents, slip op. at 3–4.
`
`Based on the information presented in the Motions and Declarations,
`
`and in view of Petitioner’s assertion that Patent Owner does not oppose the
`
`Motions, we find that good cause exists for granting the Motions and
`
`permitting the pro hac vice admission of Mr. Wilson. Petitioner must
`
`submit a Power of Attorney for Mr. Wilson in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.10(b) and must update its mandatory notices in accordance with
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3).
`
`
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that the Motions are granted, and Mr. Jeremy Wilson is
`
`authorized to represent Petitioner only as back-up counsel in each
`
`proceeding identified in the heading;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a registered practitioner will continue to
`
`represent Petitioner as lead counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Wilson shall comply with the Office
`
`Patent Trial Practice Guide (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;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Wilson is subject to the USPTO’s
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and to
`
`the USPTO’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a);
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2021-00182 (Patent 9,680,068 B2)
`IPR2021-00183 (Patent 7,588,828 B2)
`IPR2021-00184 (Patent 7,803,423 B2)
`IPR2021-00185 (Patent 7,867,557 B2)
`IPR2021-00186 (Patent 8,524,365 B2)
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) business days of the date
`
`of this order, Petitioner shall submit a Power of Attorney for Mr. Wilson, in
`
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b); and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) business days of the date
`
`of this order, Petitioner shall update its mandatory notices to identify
`
`Mr. Wilson as back-up counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3).
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`F. Christopher Mizzo
`Gregory Arovas
`Stefan Miller
`Todd Baker
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`chris.mizzo@kirkland.com
`greg.arovas@kirkland.com
`stefan.miller@kirkland.com
`todd.baker@kirkland.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`William Meunier
`Peter Cuomo
`MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C.
`wameunier@mintz.com
`pjcuomo@mintz.com
`
`4
`
`