`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper: 19
` Entered: October 20, 2017
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`ROQUETTE FRERES, S.A.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TATE & LYLE INGREDIENTS AMERICAS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2017-01506, Patent 7,608,436 B2
`Case IPR2017-01507, Patent 8,057,840 B21
`____________
`
`
`Before LORA M. GREEN, GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN,
`and JACQUELINE T. HARLOW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motion for
`Pro Hac Vice Admission of Daniel J. Thomasch
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1This decision addresses issues common to both proceedings, therefore, we
`issue a single decision that is entered in both case files. For convenience, we
`refer to papers filed in IPR2017-01506.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01506 (Patent 7,608,436 B2)
`IPR2017-01507 (Patent 8,057,840 B2)
`
`
`On September 18, 2017, Petitioner filed a motion for pro hac vice
`admission of Daniel J. Thomasch (Paper 8) supported by a declaration of
`Mr. Tomash (Exhibit 1040). No opposition was filed by Patent Owner. See
`Paper 5, 2 (citing Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-
`00639 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (setting a one week time period for
`filing an opposition to a motion for pro hac vice admission)). Based on our
`review of Petitioner’s motion and Mr. Tomash’s declaration, we determine
`that Petitioner establishes “good cause” for the admission.
`It is:
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Mr. Tomash is granted; Mr. Tomash is authorized to represent Petitioner
`only as back-up counsel in the instant proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in the instant proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Tomash shall 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
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Tomash shall 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.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-01506 (Patent 7,608,436 B2)
`IPR2017-01507 (Patent 8,057,840 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David Glandorf
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`dglandorf@gibsondunn.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Paul Berghoff
`James Suggs
`Richard Carden
`MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP
`berghoff@mbhb.com
`suggs@mbhb.com
`carden@mbhb.com
`
`3
`
`