Trials@uspto.gov
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No.7
`Dated: April 24, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`EBAY INC. and PAYPAL, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`XPRT VENTURES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
` Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)1
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, KEVIN F. TURNER, and
`MICHAEL R. ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`Per Curiam
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Jared Bobrow
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are the same in all identified cases. 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 subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No.7
`Dated: April 24, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`EBAY INC. and PAYPAL, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`XPRT VENTURES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
` Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)1
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, KEVIN F. TURNER, and
`MICHAEL R. ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`Per Curiam
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Jared Bobrow
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are the same in all identified cases. 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 subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`On February 7, 2017, Petitioner filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Jared Bobrow. Paper 6 (“Mot.”).2 A Declaration of Jared
`Bobrow in Support of Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission was
`submitted with the Motion. Ex. 1016. Petitioner filed a Power of Attorney
`including Mr. Bobrow. Paper 2. Patent Owner did not file an opposition. In
`view of the above, after consideration of the record before us, Petitioner’s
`Motions are granted.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`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, subject to
`the condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner. 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.
`In this proceeding, lead counsel for Petitioner, Adrian Percer, is a
`registered practitioner. Petitioner asserts there is good cause for us to
`recognize Mr. Bobrow pro hac vice in this proceeding. Mot. 2–4.
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the papers and exhibits filed in
`CBM2017-00024. Petitioner filed substantially identical papers and exhibits
`in CBM2017-00025, CBM2017-00026, CBM2017-00027, CBM2017-
`00028, and CBM2017-00029.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)
`
`Petitioner’s assertions in this regard are supported by the Declaration of Mr.
`Bobrow. Ex. 1016.
`Mr. Bobrow declares that he is a member in good standing with the
`State Bar of California and was admitted to the California Bar on June 16,
`1988. Ex. 1016 ¶ 1. Mr. Bobrow also declares that he is an experienced
`litigation attorney familiar with the subject matter at issue in these
`proceedings. Id. ¶¶ 8–9. Mr. Bobrow declares that he has never been
`suspended or disbarred by any court or administrative body (id. ¶ 2), has not
`been denied for admission to practice before any court or administrative
`body (id. ¶ 3), and has not been sanctioned or cited for contempt by any
`court or administrative body (id. ¶ 4).
`Mr. Bobrow additionally declares he has read and will comply with
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s rules as set for in 37
`C.F.R. § 42 (id. ¶ 5), and agrees to be subject to the USPTO Rules of
`Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a) (id. ¶ 6).
`Mr. Bobrow declares that he is counsel for Petitioner eBay, Inc. and
`PayPal, Inc. in related district court litigation involving the patents at issue
`in these proceedings. Id. ¶ 9. On this record, we determine that Mr. Bobrow
`has sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner as
`back-up counsel in these proceedings. Accordingly, Petitioner has
`established that there is good cause for the pro hac vice admission of
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)
`
`Mr. Bobrow in this proceedings. Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Jarod Bobrow are granted.
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`
`Jared Bobrow are granted, and Mr. Bobrow is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must file updated mandatory
`notices identifying Mr. Bobrow as back-up counsel in accordance with 37
`C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bobrow shall 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
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bobrow shall be subject to the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), as well as the
`Office’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et.
`seq.
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case CBM2017-00024 (Patent 7,610,244 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00025 (Patent 7,627,528 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00026 (Patent 7,512,563 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00027 (Patent 7,483,856 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00028 (Patent 7,599,881 B2)
`Case CBM2017-00029 (Patent 7,567,937 B2)
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`Adrian Percer
`Jared Bobrow
`Brian Chang
`WEIL, GOTSHAL AND MANGES LLP
`adrian.percer@weil.com
`jared.bobrow@weil.com
`brian.chang@weil.com
`
`Naveen Modi
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`PAUL HASTINGS LLP
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`George Likourezos
`Michael A. Scaturo
`g.likourezos@verizon.net
`adcourt@optonline.net
`
`
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
