`571-272-7822 Entered: January 25, 2016
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`RPX CORPORATION, HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA, INC.,
`HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD., HUAWEI DEVICE CO. LTD.,
`HUAWEI DEVICE (DONGGUAN) CO., LTD., and
`HUAWEI DEVICE USA, INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`RED ANVIL, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2016-00003
`Patent No. 5,680,223
`_______________
`
`
`Before TRENTON A. WARD, LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, and
`CHRISTA P. ZADO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ZADO, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Mr. Brandon LaPray
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00003
`Patent 5,680,223
`
`Patent Owner, Red Anvil LLC, filed a motion for pro hac vice
`
`admission of Mr. Brandon LaPray. Paper 13. Patent Owner also filed a
`
`declaration from Mr. LaPray in support of its motion. Ex. 2001. Petitioners,
`
`RPX Corp., Huawei Tech. USA, Inc., Huawei Tech. Co., Ltd., Huawei
`
`Device (Dongguan) Co. Ltd., and Huawei Device USA, Inc., have not
`
`opposed the motion.
`
`Having reviewed the Motion and the declaration of Mr. LaPray, we
`
`conclude that Mr. LaPray has sufficient qualifications to represent Patent
`
`Owner in this proceeding and that Patent Owner has shown good cause for
`
`Mr. LaPray’s pro hac vice admission. See Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel
`
`Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (setting forth the
`
`requirements for pro hac vice admission) (Paper 7). Mr. LaPray will be
`
`permitted to appear pro hac vice in this proceeding as back-up counsel only.
`
`See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motion for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Brandon LaPray is granted, and Mr. LaPray is authorized to represent Patent
`
`Owner only as back-up counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. LaPray is 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 Mr. LaPray is subject to the USPTO’s
`
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the USPTO’s Rules
`
`of Professional Conduct set forth at 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101–11.901.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-00003
`Patent 5,680,223
`
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`
`John D. Vandenberg
`Kristen L. Reichenbach
`KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
`john.vandenberg@klarquist.com
`kristen.reichenbach@klarquist.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`Matt Brower
`browerlitigation@gmail.com
`
`Brandon LaPray
`Brandon@thetexaslawoffice.com
`
`
`3