`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 13
`Entered: November 28, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ROVI GUIDES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2017-01065 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
` IPR2017-01066 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
` IPR2017-01143 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)1
`
`____________
`
`Before JESSICA C. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Mr. James R. Batchelder
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses an issue that is identical in all three cases. We, therefore,
`exercise our discretion to issue one Decision to be filed in each case. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style heading in any subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01065 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01066 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01143 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`Patent Owner, Rovi Guides, Inc. (“Rovi”), filed a Motion for
`Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mr. James R. Batchelder in each of the
`proceedings identified above. Paper 11 (“Mot.”).2 Petitioner, Comcast
`Cable Communications, LLC, does not oppose these Motions. For the
`reasons provided below, Rovi’s Motions are granted.
`
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`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, subject to
`the condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner. The
`representative Order authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission requires
`a statement of facts showing there is good cause for us to recognize counsel
`pro hac vice, and an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to
`appear. See Mot. 3 (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”)).
`In these proceedings, lead counsel for Rovi, Mr. Mark D. Rowland, is
`a registered practitioner. Paper 7, 2. Rovi asserts that there is good cause
`for us to recognize Mr. Batchelder pro hac vice in these proceedings.
`Mot. 2–3. Rovi’s assertions in this regard are supported by a Declaration of
`Mr. Batchelder. Ex. 2004.
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the papers filed in Case IPR2017-
`01065. Similar papers were filed in Cases IPR2017-01066 and IPR2017-
`01143.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01065 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01066 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01143 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`
`
`Mr. Batchelder declares that he is a member in good standing of the
`State Bar of California. Ex. 2004 ¶ 1. Mr. Batchelder also declares that he
`is familiar with the subject matter at issue in these proceedings, and Rovi has
`requested that he represent it in these proceedings. Id. ¶ 8. Moreover, the
`facts alleged in Mr. Batchelder’s Declaration comply with all the
`requirements set forth in our representative Order authorizing motions for
`pro hac vice admission. See Ex. 2004 ¶¶ 1–7; Mot. 2–3.
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Batchelder has sufficient legal
`and technical qualifications to represent Rovi in these proceedings.
`Accordingly, Rovi has established that there is good cause for the pro hac
`vice admission of Mr. Batchelder in these proceedings.
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Rovi’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Mr.
`James R. Batchelder are GRANTED;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Batchelder is authorized to represent
`Rovi as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Rovi is to continue to have a registered
`practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Batchelder shall comply with the
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756 (Aug. 14, 2012), and
`the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37,
`Code of Federal Regulations; and
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01065 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01066 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01143 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Batchelder shall be subject to the
`Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), as well as the
`Office’s Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101
`et seq.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01065 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01066 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`IPR2017-01143 (Patent 8,046,801 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Frederic M. Meeker
`Bradley C. Wright
`Scott M. Kelly
`Azuka C. Dike
`Joshua Davenport
`Jared Radkiewicz
`Camille Sauer
`BANNER AND WITCOFF, LTD.
`fmeeker@bannerwitcoff.com
`bwright@bannerwitcoff.com
`skelly@bannerwitcoff.com
`adike@bannerwitcoff.com
`jdavenport@bannerwitcoff.com
`jradkiewicz@bannerwitcoff.com
`csauer@bannerwitcoff.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Mark D. Rowland
`Gabrielle E. Higgins
`Scott A. McKeown
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`Mark.Rowland@ropesgray.com
`Gabrielle.Higgins@ropesgray.com
`Scott.McKeown@ropesgray.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`