`571.272.7822
`
`
`
` Paper No. 22
`
` Entered: July 23, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`FUJIFILM CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SONY CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2017-01389 (Patent 6,896,959 B2)
` IPR2017-01390 (Patent 7,115,331 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before JON B. TORNQUIST, JEFFREY W. ABRAHAM, and
`ELIZABETH M. ROESEL, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ABRAHAM, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Mr. Andrew J. Bramhall
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are identical in both proceedings. We
`exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each proceeding.
`The Parties, however, are not authorized to use this style heading in any
`subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01389 (Patent 6,896,959 B2)
`IPR2017-01390 (Patent 7,115,331 B2)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Andrew J. Bramhall in each of the above-identified proceedings
`(collectively “Motions”). Paper 19.2 The Motions are supported by
`Declarations of Mr. Bramhall (collectively “Declarations”). Paper 19, 4–5.3
`Patent Owner indicates that Petitioner does not oppose the pro hac vice
`admission of Mr. Bramhall. Paper 19, 2. We note that Powers of Attorney
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) have not been submitted for
`Mr. Bramhall.
`Having reviewed the Motions and supporting Declarations, we
`determine that good cause exists for granting admission pro hac vice to Mr.
`Bramhall.
`
`Accordingly, it is:
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission
`of Mr. Bramhall are granted; Mr. Bramhall is authorized to represent Patent
`Owner only as back-up counsel in the instant proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for the instant
`proceedings;
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we cite to the paper filed in IPR2017-01389.
`A similar paper was filed in IPR2017-01390. See Paper 19.
`3 Patent Owner filed the Declarations as part of the Motions (Paper 19, 4–5)
`in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board End to End (PTAB E2E) system. The
`parties are reminded that affidavits and declarations must be filed as
`exhibits, so they may be referenced individually by exhibit number. See
`37 C.F.R. § 42.63.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01389 (Patent 6,896,959 B2)
`IPR2017-01390 (Patent 7,115,331 B2)
`
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bramhall is 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;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Bramhall is 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.;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall, within seven (7) days
`of the date of this Order, submit Powers of Attorney identifying
`Mr. Bramhall in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b); and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall, within seven (7) days
`of the date of this Order, file updated mandatory notices identifying
`Mr. Bramhall as back-up counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3).
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01389 (Patent 6,896,959 B2)
`IPR2017-01390 (Patent 7,115,331 B2)
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Eliot Williams
`eliot.williams@bakerbotts.com
`
`Robert Scheinfeld
`robert.scheinfeld@bakerbotts.com
`
`Robert Maier
`robert.maier@bakerbotts.com
`
`Paul Ragusa
`paul.ragusa@bakerbotts.com
`
`Jessica Lin
`jessica.lin@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Kevin Johnson
`kevinjohnson@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Joseph Milowic III
`josephmilowic@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Brett Watkins
`brettwatkins@quinnemanuel.com
`
`John McKee
`johnmckee@quinnemanuel.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
