`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper No. 12
`Entered: June 29, 2018
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`
`HYTERA COMMUNICATIONS CORP. LTD.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00176
`Patent 6,591,111 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`Before DANIEL N. FISHMAN and PATRICK M. BOUCHER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`DECISION
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Adam R. Alper and Michael W. De Vries
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Adam R.
`Alper and Michael W. De Vries in this proceeding. Paper 10 (“Motion”).
`The Motion is unopposed. The Motion is granted.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00176
`Patent 6,591,111 B1
`
`
`In its Motion, Patent Owner states that there is good cause to
`recognize Mr. Alper during this proceeding because “Mr. Alper is an
`experienced litigator with more than 18 years of patent litigation
`experience,” and because Mr. Alper is Patent Owner’s “litigation counsel in
`the co-pending district court and International Trade Commission litigations
`on this same patent between same parties.” Id. at 9. The Motion includes,
`as an exhibit, a Declaration made by Mr. Alper, attesting to and sufficiently
`explaining these facts. Ex. 2001. In addition, Mr. Alper acknowledges his
`understanding that he “agree[s] to be subject to the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).”
`Id. at 4.
`Similarly, Patent Owner states that there is good cause to recognize
`Mr. De Vries during this proceeding because “Mr. De Vries has over 17
`years of patent litigation experience,” and because Mr. De Vries is Patent
`Owner’s “litigation counsel in the co-pending district court and International
`Trade Commission litigations on this same patent between same parties.”
`Mot. 10. The Motion also includes, as an exhibit, a Declaration made by
`Mr. De Vries, attesting to and sufficiently explaining these facts, as well as
`acknowledging that he “agree[s] to be subject to the United States Patent and
`Trademark Office Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 11.101 et seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).”
`Ex. 2002.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00176
`Patent 6,591,111 B1
`
`
`Upon consideration, Patent Owner has demonstrated sufficiently that
`Messrs. Alper and De Vries have sufficient legal and technical qualifications
`to represent Patent Owner in this proceeding.
`
`It is
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`of Adam R. Alper and Michael W. De Vries is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Messrs. Alper and De Vries 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 the C.F.R., and is subject to the Office’s
`Code of Professional Responsibility set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.,
`and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a); and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in this proceeding; Messrs.
`Alper and De Vries are authorized to represent Patent Owner only as back-
`up counsel in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00176
`Patent 6,591,111 B1
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Todd R. Tucker
`ttucker@calfee.com
`Mark W. McDougall
`mmcdougall@calfee.com
`Joshua A. Friedman
`jfriedman@calfee.com
`Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP
`ipupdate@calfee.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jon R. Carter
`jon.carter@kirkland.com
`Eugene Goryunov
`eugene.goryunov@kirkland.com
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`
`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
