`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 20
`
`Entered: June 7, 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
`Conditionally Granting Patent Owner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Megan P. Keane and Michael N. Kennedy
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`
`Patent Owner filed motions requesting pro hac vice admission of
`Megan P. Keane (Paper 12) and Michael N. Kennedy (Paper 13). Patent
`Owner submitted declarations from Ms. Keane (Ex. 2026) and Mr. Kennedy
`(Ex. 2027) in support of the respective motions. Patent Owner asserts that
`Petitioner does not oppose the motions. Paper 12, 1; Paper 13, 1.
`Upon review of the record before us, we note that Powers of Attorney
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) have not been submitted for Ms.
`Keane and Mr. Kennedy. In view thereof, and for the reasons set forth
`below, Patent Owner’s Motions are conditionally granted, subject to Patent
`Owner filing the appropriate Powers of Attorney and updated mandatory
`notice.
`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 motions and the accompanying
`declarations, we conclude that Ms. Keane and Mr. Kennedy have sufficient
`legal and technical qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this
`proceeding, that Ms. Keane and Mr. Kennedy have demonstrated sufficient
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`familiarity with the subject matter of this proceeding, and, that there is a
`need for Patent Owner to be represented by counsel with litigation
`experience. Accordingly, Patent Owner has established good cause for pro
`hac vice admission of Ms. Keane and Mr. Kennedy. Ms. Keane and Mr.
`Kennedy will be permitted to serve as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.10(c).
`
`Accordingly, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s motions for pro hac vice admission
`of Megan P. Keane (Paper 12) and Michael N. Kennedy (Paper 13) are
`conditionally granted provided that within seven (7) business days of the
`date of this order, Patent Owner must submit Powers of Attorney for Ms.
`Keane and Mr. Kennedy in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b); Ms.
`Keane and Mr. Kennedy are authorized to act as back-up counsel in the
`instant proceeding only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner must file an updated
`mandatory notice identifying Ms. Keane and Mr. Kennedy as back-up
`counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner continue to have a
`registered practitioner serve as lead counsel in this proceeding;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Keane 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;
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00203
`Patent 6,649,180 B1
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Kennedy 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;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Keane 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.; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Kennedy 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.
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
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
