`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 30
`Entered: March 18, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`UNDER ARMOUR, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ADIDAS AG,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-00697 (Patent 7,905,815 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00698 (Patent 8,092,345 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00700 (Patent 8,579,767 B2)
`_______________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JENNIFER S. BISK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Zachary C. Garthe and Robert T. Vlasis
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00697 (Patent 7,905,815 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00698 (Patent 8,092,345 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00700 (Patent 8,579,767 B2)
`
`
`Petitioner filed a motion for pro hac vice admission of Zachary C. Garthe
`
`and Robert T. Vlasis in each of these proceedings. Papers 25, 26.1 Petitioner also
`
`filed declarations in support. Paper 25, 4–6; Paper 26, 4–6. Petitioner states that
`
`the motions are unopposed. Paper 25, 3; Paper 26, 3.
`
`Having reviewed the motions and the accompanying declarations, we
`
`conclude that Mr. Garthe and Mr. Vlasis have sufficient qualifications to represent
`
`Petitioner in these proceedings and that Petitioner has shown good cause for pro
`
`hac vice admission. Both Mr. Garthe and Mr. Vlasis will be permitted to appear
`
`pro hac vice in this proceeding as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s motions for pro hac vice admission of Zachary
`
`C. Garthe and Robert T. Vlasis are granted, and Zachary C. Garthe and Robert T.
`
`Vlasis are authorized to represent Petitioner only as back-up counsel in these
`
`proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a registered
`
`practitioner as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Zachary C. Garthe and Robert T. Vlasis are to
`
`comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of
`
`Practice for Trials, as set forth in Title 37, Part 42 of the Code of Federal
`
`Regulations; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Zachary C. Garthe and Robert T. Vlasis are
`
`subject to the USPTO’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and
`
`
`1 Petitioner filed substantially identical motions in all three cases. All references
`will be to papers and exhibits in IPR2015-00697.
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2015-00697 (Patent 7,905,815 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00698 (Patent 8,092,345 B2)
`Case IPR2015-00700 (Patent 8,579,767 B2)
`
`the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth at 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101–
`
`11.901.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Brian Ferguson
`brian.ferguson@weil.com
`
`Anish Desai
`anish.desai@weil.com
`
`
`
`Patent Owner:
`
`
`Mitchell Stockwell
`mstockwell@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Wab Kadaba
`wkadaba@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Jonathan Olinger
`jolinger@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
` 3