`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 28
`Entered: April 8, 2014
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`DYNAMIC DRINKWARE LLC
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`NATIONAL GRAPHICS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR2013-00131
`Patent 6,635,196
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`THOMAS L. GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Decision on Motion
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00131
`Patent 6,635,196
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a motion for pro hac vice admission of Matthew R.
`
`McClean. Paper 24. Petitioner does not oppose. The motion is granted.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may recognize counsel pro hac
`
`vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. In authorizing motions
`
`for pro hac vice, 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 this
`
`proceeding.
`
`In its motion, Patent Owner states that there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize Mr. McClean pro hac vice because Mr. McClean is an experienced
`
`litigating attorney and a member in good standing of the Wisconsin bar. In
`
`addition, the motion states that Mr. McClean has an established familiarity with the
`
`subject matter at issue in this proceeding based on his work as counsel in a district
`
`court case involving the same patent. Mr. McClean has made a declaration
`
`attesting to, and explaining, these facts. The declaration complies with the
`
`requirements set forth in the Notice.
`
`Upon consideration, Patent Owner has demonstrated that Mr. McClean has
`
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this
`
`proceeding. Moreover, the Board recognizes that there is a need for Patent Owner
`
`to have Mr. McClean be involved in this proceeding. Accordingly, Patent Owner
`
`has established that there is good cause for admitting Mr. McClean.
`
`Attention is directed to the Office’s Final Rule adopting new Rules of
`
`Professional Conduct. See Changes to Representation of Others Before the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office; Final Rule, 78 Fed. Reg. 20180 (Apr.
`
`3, 2013). The Final Rule also removes Part 10 of Title 37, Code of Federal
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00131
`Patent 6,635,196
`
`Regulations. The changes set forth in that Final Rule including the USPTO’s
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct took effect on May 3, 2013. Therefore, Mr.
`
`McClean is subject to the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct that took effect
`
`May 3, 2013.
`
`It is therefore
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion for admission of Matthew R.
`
`McClean pro hac vice is granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a registered
`
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. McClean 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
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. McClean is 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.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00131
`Patent 6,635,196
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Joseph S. Heino
`Patrick M. Bergin
`DAVIS AND KUELTHAU, S.C.
`jheino@dkattorneys.com
`pbergin@dkattorneys.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Michael T. Griggs
`Keith M. Baxter
`BOYLE FREDERICKSON, S.C.
`mtg@boylefred.com
`kmb@boylefred.com
`
`4
`
`