throbber
Paper No. 11
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BLACKBERRY LTD.
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-00911
`Patent 8,745,149
`———————
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
`OF SHARON LEE
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00911
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Sharon Lee
`
`Patent Owner Blackberry Ltd. (“Blackberry”), respectfully requests that the
`
`Board recognize Sharon Lee, Esq. as pro hac vice counsel for Blackberry during
`
`this proceeding. Petitioner Google LLC (“Google”) h as indicated that it does
`
`not oppose this mo tion.
`
`I.
`
`BACKGROUND
`Blackberry’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission is being filed pursuant to
`
`and in compliance with the Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition and Time
`
`Period for Filing Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response, which was filed March
`
`14, 2017 (Paper 5) (the “Notice”). The Notice authorizes parties to file motions
`
`for pro hac vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Further to the Notice, such
`
`“motions shall be filed in accordance with the ‘Order – Authorizing Motion for
`
`Pro Hac Vice Admission’ in Case IPR2013-00639.”
`
`II.
`
`TIME OF FILING
`This Motion for Pro Hac Vice admission is being filed in accordance with
`
`the Order Authorizing the Filing of a Motion for Pro Hac Vice admission in Case
`
`IPR2013-00639, and is being filed more than 21 days after service of the Petition.
`
`III.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`As required by the Order, the following statement of facts, supported by the
`
`attached Declaration of Sharon Lee in Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission (Ex. 2004), shows that there is good cause for the Patent Trial and
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00911
`
`
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Sharon Lee
`
`
`Appeal Board (“Board”) to recognize Ms. Lee pro hac vice in this proceeding. As
`
`required by 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Blackberry’s lead counsel, Ching-Lee Fukuda, is
`
`a registered practitioner experienced in proceedings before the USPTO.
`
`Ms. Lee is an experienced litigation attorney. Ms. Lee has been a litigating
`
`attorney for more than five years, and has been involved in numerous patent
`
`litigation cases in federal courts and before the International Trade Commission
`
`and post-grant proceedings before the Board. Ms. Lee’s experience includes
`
`representing a wide range of clients in complex intellectual property litigation.
`
`Ms. Lee is a member in good standing of the New York State Bar and the District
`
`of Columbia Bar, with no suspensions or disbarments from practice, nor any
`
`application for admission to practice denied, nor any sanctions or contempt
`
`citations, and is admitted to practice in the United States Court of Appeals for the
`
`Federal Circuit. Her mailing address is at Sidley Austin LLP, 1501 K Street, N.W.,
`
`Washington, D.C. 20005, her email address is Sharon.Lee@sidley.com, and her
`
`direct dial is (202) 736-8510.
`
`Ms. Lee has reviewed and is familiar with (i) U.S. Patent No. 8,745,149, the
`
`patent at issue in this proceeding, (ii) the prior art relied upon in Google’s Petition,
`
`(iii) the legal and factual arguments asserted by Google, and (iv) the developments
`
`in this proceeding since the filing of Google’s Petition, as well as the developments
`
`in related matters before the Board. Ms. Lee has also been involved in a number of
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00911
`
`
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Sharon Lee
`
`
`other proceedings before the Board, has been admitted pro hac vice as backup
`
`counsel in other matters before the Board, and is familiar with its established
`
`practices. Accordingly, she has established familiarity with the subject matter at
`
`issue in this proceeding and the conduct of the proceeding to date. Ex. 2004.
`
`Ms. Lee has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules for Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of 37
`
`C.F.R., and she agrees to be subject to the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct
`
`set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§11.01 et seq., and to disciplinary jurisdiction under 37
`
`C.F.R. §11.19(a). Ex. 2004.
`
`IV. ANALYSIS
`The facts contained in the Statement of Facts above, and contained in the
`
`Lee Declaration (Ex. 2004), establish that there is good cause to admit Ms. Lee pro
`
`hac vice in this proceeding under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Blackberry’s lead counsel
`
`is a registered practitioner, Ms. Lee is an experienced litigating attorney, and Ms.
`
`Lee has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in these
`
`proceedings.
`
`V. CONCLUSION
`Therefore, there is good cause for the Board to recognize Sharon Lee as Pro
`
`Hac Vice for Blackberry Ltd. during these proceedings.
`
`

`

`IPR2017-00911
`
`
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Sharon Lee
`
`
`
`Dated: October 23, 2017
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`/Ching-Lee Fukuda/
` Ching-Lee Fukuda
`Reg. No. 44,334
`Sidley Austin LLP
`787 Seventh Avenue
`New York, NY 10019
`(212) 839-7364
`(212)839-5599
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`

`

`IPR2017-0091 1
`
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice of Sharon Lee
`
`Exhibit List
`
`EX. 2001 US. Patent No. 7,181,497 to Appelman et al.
`
`Ex. 2002 US. Patent No. 7,219,109 to Lapuyade et a1.
`
`Admission
`
`Ex. 2003 The American Heritage College Dictionary (4th Ed. 2004) (Excerpt)
`
`EX. 2004 Declaration of Sharon Lee in Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), this is to certify that on October 23, 2017, I caused
`
`to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing and any accompanying
`
`exhibits by electronic mail on the following counsel:
`
`Naveen Modi
`Joseph E. Palys
`Phillip W. Citroën
`John S. Holley
`PH-Google-Blackberry-IPR@paulhastings.com
`
`
`
`Dated: October 23, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`/Ching-Lee Fukuda/
` Ching-Lee Fukuda
`Reg. No. 44,334
`Sidley Austin LLP
`787 Seventh Avenue
`New York, NY 10019
`P: (212) 839-7364
`F: (212)839-5599
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`

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