throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 13
`Entered: March 11, 2016
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ALARM.COM INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`VIVINT, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2015-01965 (Patent 7,884,713 B1)
`Case IPR2015-01967 (Patent 7,884,713 B1)
`Case IPR2015-01977 (Patent 6,924,727 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01995 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`Case IPR2015-01997 (Patent 6,717,513 B1)
`Case IPR2015-02003 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`Case IPR2015-02004 (Patent 6,147,601)
`Case IPR2016-00116 (Patent 6,147,601)
`Case IPR2016-00155 (Patent 6,147,601)
`Case IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`Case IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, JAMES B. ARPIN, and
`CHARLES J. BOUDREAU, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues pertaining to all eleven cases. Therefore, we
`exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent
`papers.
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01965 and IPR2015-01967 (Patent 7,884,713 B1)
`IPR2015-01977 (Patent 6,924,727 B2)
`IPR2015-01997 (Patent 6,717,513 B1)
`IPR2015-01995 and IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`IPR2015-02003 and IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`IPR2015-02004, IPR2016-00116, and IPR2016-00155 (Patent 6,147,601)
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Roger G. Brooks and Teena-Ann V. Sankoorikal
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`Petitioner, Alarm.com Incorporated (“Petitioner”), moves for pro hac
`vice admission of Mr. Roger G. Brooks and Ms. Teena-Ann V. Sankoorikal.
`IPR2015-001965, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2015-001967, Papers 3 and 4;
`IPR2015-01977, Papers 4 and 5; IPR2015-01995, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2015-
`01997, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2015-02003, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2015-02004,
`Papers 3 and 4; IPR2016-00116, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2016-00155, Papers 3
`and 4; IPR2016-00161, Papers 3 and 4; IPR2016-00173, Papers 3 and 4.
`Petitioner provides Affidavits from Mr. Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal in
`support of its Motions.2 Id. Patent Owner, Vivint, Inc., has not opposed Mr.
`Brooks’s or Ms. Sankoorikal’s admission pro hac vice in these cases.
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motions and the accompanying
`Affidavits from Mr. Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal, we conclude that Mr.
`Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal have sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Petitioner in these cases. Mr. Brooks and Ms.
`Sankoorikal have demonstrated the necessary familiarity with the subject
`
`
`2 The affidavits were included in the papers filed in each case, rather than as
`separate exhibits. The parties are cautioned that such affidavits should be
`filed as separate exhibits.
`
`2
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01965 and IPR2015-01967 (Patent 7,884,713 B1)
`IPR2015-01977 (Patent 6,924,727 B2)
`IPR2015-01997 (Patent 6,717,513 B1)
`IPR2015-01995 and IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`IPR2015-02003 and IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`IPR2015-02004, IPR2016-00116, and IPR2016-00155 (Patent 6,147,601)
`
`
`matter of these cases and that there is a need for Petitioner to have counsel
`with experience as a litigation attorney in patent matters involved in these
`cases. Accordingly, Petitioner has established good cause for Mr. Brooks’s
`and Ms. Sankoorikal’s pro hac vice admission. Mr. Brooks and Ms.
`Sankoorikal are permitted to appear pro hac vice in these cases as back-up
`counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`Mr. Roger G. Brooks and Ms. Teena-Ann V. Sankoorikal are granted, and
`Mr. Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal are authorized to represent Petitioner as
`back-up counsel in these cases;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in each case;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal shall
`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. Brooks and Ms. Sankoorikal are
`subject to the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a)
`and to the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`IPR2015-01965 and IPR2015-01967 (Patent 7,884,713 B1)
`IPR2015-01977 (Patent 6,924,727 B2)
`IPR2015-01997 (Patent 6,717,513 B1)
`IPR2015-01995 and IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`IPR2015-02003 and IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`IPR2015-02004, IPR2016-00116, and IPR2016-00155 (Patent 6,147,601)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`William H. Mandir
`Brian K. Shelton
`SUGHRUE MION, PLLC
`wmandir@sughrue.com
`bshelton@sughrue.com
`
`Roger G. Brooks
`Teena-Ann V. Sankoorikal
`CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP
`rgbrooks@cravath.com
`tsankoor@cravath.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert Greene Sterne
`Jason D. Eisenberg
`Michael V. Messinger
`Christian Camarce
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`rsterne@skgf.com
`jasone-PTAB@skgf.com
`mikem-PTAB@skgf.com
`ccamarce-PTAB@skgf.com
`PTAB@skgf.com
`
`4
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket