`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 25
`Entered: October 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 B2)
`Case IPR2016-00116 (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.
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Marc J. Khadpe
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues pertaining to all four proceedings. Therefore,
`we exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each proceedings.
`The parties are not authorized to use this style heading for any subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01965 (Patent 7,884,713 B2)
`IPR2016-00116 (Patent 6,147,601)
`IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`
`
`Petitioner, Alarm.com, Inc., moves for pro hac vice admission of
`Mr. Marc J. Khadpe. IPR2015-01965, Paper 26; IPR2016-00116, Paper 23;
`IPR2016-00161, Paper 27; IPR2016-00173, Paper 23. Petitioner provides
`Affidavits from Mr. Khadpe in support of its Motions. IPR2015-01965,
`Ex. 1031; IPR2016-00116, Ex. 1117; IPR2016-00161, Ex. 1117; IPR2016-
`00173, Ex. 1115. Petitioner also states that it has conferred with Patent
`Owner, Vivint, Inc., regarding Mr. Khadpe’s admission pro hac vice and
`that Petitioner does not oppose Petitioner’s Motions. IPR2015-01965,
`Paper 26, 3; IPR2016-00116, Paper 23, 3; IPR2016-00161, Paper 27, 3;
`IPR2016-00173, Paper 23, 3.
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motions and the accompanying
`Declarations from Mr. Khadpe, we conclude that Mr. Khadpe has sufficient
`legal and technical qualifications to represent Petitioner in these cases, that
`Mr. Khadpe has demonstrated the necessary familiarity with the subject
`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. Khadpe’s
`pro hac vice admission. Mr. Khadpe will be 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. Marc J. Khadpe are granted, and Mr. Khadpe is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner as lead counsel in these cases;
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01965 (Patent 7,884,713 B2)
`IPR2016-00116 (Patent 6,147,601)
`IPR2016-00161 (Patent 6,462,654 B1)
`IPR2016-00173 (Patent 6,535,123 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Khadpe 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. Khadpe is 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. §§ 11.101–11.901.
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`William H. Mandir
`Brian K. Shelton
`SUGHRUE MION PLLC
`wmandir@sughrue.com
`bshelton@sughrue.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert Greene Sterne
`Jason D. Eisenberg
`Michael V. Messinger
`Christian A. Camarce
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`rsterne-PTAB@skgf.com
`jasone-PTAB@skgf.com
`mikem-PTAB@skgf.com
`ccamarce-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`
`3
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
