`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 19
`
`Entered: June 5, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`QUALICAPS CO., LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before BRIAN P. MURPHY, CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER, and
`JEFFREY W. ABRAHAM, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`MURPHY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Jonathan D. Olinger
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`
`Petitioner moves to have Mr. Jonathan D. Olinger admitted pro hac
`
`vice in this proceeding. Paper 8 (“Motion”). Petitioner submitted a
`
`declaration from Mr. Olinger in support of this motion. Ex. 1015.
`
`Petitioner asserts that Patent Owner does not oppose the Motion. Motion 1.
`
`In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), we may recognize counsel
`
`pro hac vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. In
`
`authorizing a motion for pro hac vice admission, the Board requires the
`
`moving party to provide a statement of facts showing there is good cause for
`
`the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice and an affidavit or declaration
`
`of the individual seeking to appear in the proceeding. See Paper 3, 2 (citing
`
`Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-00639 (PTAB
`
`Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (representative “Order – Authorizing Motion for
`
`Pro Hac Vice Admission”)).
`
`Based on the facts set forth in the motion and the accompanying
`
`declaration, we conclude that Mr. Olinger has sufficient legal and technical
`
`qualifications to represent Petitioner in this proceeding, that Mr. Olinger has
`
`demonstrated the necessarily familiarity with the subject matter of this
`
`proceeding, and, that there is a need for Petitioner to be represented by
`
`counsel with litigation experience. Accordingly, Petitioner has established
`
`good cause for the admission of Mr. Olinger pro hac vice. Mr. Olinger will
`
`be permitted to serve as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`
`
`We note that a power of attorney in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.10(b) was submitted for Mr. Olinger. Paper 2. We further note
`
`that Petitioner’s mandatory notices in the Petition (Paper 1, 3) include
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`
`Mr. Olinger as back-up counsel. Therefore, no updated mandatory notice is
`
`required.
`
`
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is hereby:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion to admit Mr. Jonathan D. Olinger
`
`pro hac vice (Paper 8) is granted, and Mr. Olinger is authorized to represent
`
`Petitioner as back-up counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner continue to have a registered
`
`practitioner serve as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Olinger 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. Olinger 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 et seq.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Mitchell Stockwell
`mstockwell@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Clay Holloway
`cholloway@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`Miranda Rogers
`mrogers@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jessica Parezo
`jparezo@cov.com
`
`Andrea Reister
`areister@cov.com
`
`Maryanne Armstrong
`maa@bskb.com
`
`Lynde Herzbach
`Lynde.herzbach@bskb.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
