`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Date Entered: March 25, 2015
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`LG ELECTRONICS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC., and
`LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`Cases1
`IPR2014-01386 (Patent 6,012,103)
`IPR2014-01396 (Patent 6,249,825 B1)
`IPR2014-01405 (Patent 6,493,770 B1)
`____________
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, DONNA M. PRAISS, and
`PATRICK M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PRAISS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice —
`Steven Lieberman
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are identical in all three cases. We
`exercise our discretion to issue one Decision to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01386 (Patent 6,012,103)
`IPR2014-01396 (Patent 6,249,825 B1)
`IPR2014-01405 (Patent 6,493,770 B1)
`
`
`
`Petitioner, LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG
`Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc., filed a Motion for Admission Pro
`Hac Vice of Steven Lieberman. Paper 12 (“Motion” or “Mot.”).2 Petitioner
`also filed an affidavit of Steven Lieberman. Paper 13. Petitioner has not
`filed an opposition to the Motion.
`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.
`Upon review of Petitioner’s Motions and supporting evidence, we
`determine that Petitioner has demonstrated that Steven Lieberman has
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in the
`above-identified proceedings. We also recognize that there is a need for
`Petitioner to have Mr. Lieberman involved in these proceedings.
`Accordingly, Petitioner has established that there is good cause for
`admitting Steven Lieberman.
`It is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Steven Lieberman is granted; Mr. Lieberman is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in the above-identified proceedings;
`
`2 Petitioner filed identical Motions and supporting affidavit in each of the
`captioned proceedings. For brevity, we refer here to the papers in
`IPR2014-01386.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01386 (Patent 6,012,103)
`IPR2014-01396 (Patent 6,249,825 B1)
`IPR2014-01405 (Patent 6,493,770 B1)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Steven Lieberman 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.
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01386 (Patent 6,012,103)
`IPR2014-01396 (Patent 6,249,825 B1)
`IPR2014-01405 (Patent 6,493,770 B1)
`
`
`For Petitioner:
`Jason Shapiro
`Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC
`jshapior@rfem.com
`
`Soumya P. Panda
`Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC
`spanda@rfem.com
`
`
`For Patent Owner:
`Robert R. Laurenzi
`Kaye Scholer LLP
`robert.laurenzi@kayescholer.com
`
`Jeffrey A. Miller
`Kaye Scholer LLP
`jmillerPTAB@kayescholer.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`