`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`Paper 20
`Entered: March 19, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LIMELIGHT NETWORKS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01306
`Patent 8,775,661 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before GREGG I. ANDERSON, JENNIFER MEYER CHAGNON, and
`JASON W. MELVIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Motions for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice — Jordan Hirsch and Stephen M. Ullmer
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01306
`Patent 8,775,661 B2
`
`
`Petitioner, Akamai Technologies, Inc., moves for admission pro hac
`
`vice of Jordan Hirsch. Paper 16. Petitioner filed a supporting declaration of
`
`Mr. Hirsch. Ex. 1010.
`
`Patent Owner, Limelight Networks, Inc., moves for admission pro hac
`
`vice of Stephen Ullmer. Paper 17. Patent Owner filed a supporting
`
`declaration of Mr. Ullmer. Ex. 2006.
`
`Neither party opposes the other’s motion.
`
`Pursuant to 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. In authorizing
`
`motions for pro hac vice, we require the moving party to provide 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 in the
`
`proceeding.
`
`Upon review of the motions and supporting evidence, we determine
`
`that the parties have demonstrated, in their respective motions, that Jordan
`
`Hirsch and Stephen M. Ullmer have sufficient legal and technical
`
`qualifications to represent Petitioner and Patent Owner, respectively, in this
`
`proceeding. We also recognize the need to have them involved as backup
`
`counsel. Accordingly, the parties have established good cause for admitting
`
`Jordan Hirsch and Stephen M. Ullmer.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission Pro
`
`Hac Vice of Jordan Hirsch is granted;
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01306
`Patent 8,775,661 B2
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for
`
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Stephen M. Ullmer Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`is granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner and Patent Owner are each to
`
`continue to have a registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the
`
`proceedings; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Jordan Hirsch and Stephen M. Ullmer are
`
`to comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules
`
`of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal
`
`Regulations, and to be subject to the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under
`
`37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set
`
`forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-01306
`Patent 8,775,661 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Grant K. Rowan
`Mary V. Sooter
`Peter Dichiara
`Zachary Piccolomini
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
`grant.rowan@wilmerhale.com
`mindy.sooter@wilmerhale.com
`peter.dichiara@wilmerhale.com
`zachary.piccolomini@wilmerhale.com
`
`David H. Judson
`mail@davidjudson.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Barry Schindler
`Heath Briggs
`Lennie Bersh
`Vimal Kapadia
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`schindlerb@gtlaw.com
`briggsh@gtlaw.com
`bershl@gtlaw.com
`kapadiav@gtlaw.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
