`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 12
`Entered: July 31, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`EVERYMD.COM LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases
` IPR2017-02027 (Patent 9,137,192 B2)
` IPR2018-00050 (Patent 8,504,631 B2)1
`____________
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting Petitioner’s Motions for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Mark R. Weinstein
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`1 This Decision addresses an issue that is identical in both 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.
`
`
`
`IPR2017-02027 (Patent 9,137,192 B2)
`IPR2018-00050 (Patent 8,504,631 B2)
`
`
`I. INTRODUCTION
`Petitioner, Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), filed a Motion for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice of Mr. Mark R. Weinstein in each of the proceedings
`identified above. Paper 11 (“Mot.”).2 Patent Owner, EveryMD.com LLC,
`did not file any opposition to these Motions. For the reasons provided
`below, Facebook’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 Paper 4, 2 (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 Facebook, Ms. Heidi L. Keefe,
`is a registered practitioner. Paper 2, 2. Facebook asserts that there is good
`cause for us to recognize Mr. Weinstein pro hac vice in these proceedings.
`Mot. 1–2. Facebook’s assertions in this regard are supported by a
`Declaration of Mr. Weinstein. Ex. 1022.
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the papers filed in Case IPR2017-
`02027. Similar papers were filed in Case IPR2018-00050.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2017-02027 (Patent 9,137,192 B2)
`IPR2018-00050 (Patent 8,504,631 B2)
`
`
`Mr. Weinstein declares that he is a member in good standing of the
`State Bar of California, and that he is admitted to practice before several
`federal courts. Ex. 1022 ¶ 1. Mr. Weinstein also declares that he is familiar
`with the subject matter at issue in these proceedings. Id. ¶ 8. Moreover, the
`facts alleged in Mr. Weinstein’s Declaration comply with all the
`requirements set forth in our representative Order authorizing motions for
`pro hac vice admission. See Ex. 1022 ¶¶ 2–7; Mot. 1–2.
`On this record, we determine that Mr. Weinstein has sufficient legal
`and technical qualifications to represent Facebook in these proceedings.
`Accordingly, Facebook has established that there is good cause for the pro
`hac vice admission of Mr. Weinstein in these proceedings.
`Upon review of the record before us, we note that a Power of Attorney
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) has not been submitted for Mr.
`Weinstein.
`
`
`III. ORDER
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Facebook’s Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice of
`Mr. Mark R. Weinstein are GRANTED;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weinstein is authorized to represent
`Facebook as back-up counsel in these proceedings only;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Facebook is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Facebook must file within ten (10)
`business days a Power of Attorney for Mr. Weinstein pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2017-02027 (Patent 9,137,192 B2)
`IPR2018-00050 (Patent 8,504,631 B2)
`
`
`§ 42.10, and must file updated Mandatory Notices in accordance with 37
`C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weinstein 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
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weinstein 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
`
`
`
`IPR2017-02027 (Patent 9,137,192 B2)
`IPR2018-00050 (Patent 8,504,631 B2)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Heidi L. Keefe
`Andrew C. Mace
`COOLEY LLP
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`amace@cooley.com
`zFBEveryMD@cooley.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Frank Michael Weyer
`TECHCOASTLAW
`fweyer@techcoastlaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
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
