`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 94
` Date: January 15, 2020
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTEL CORP., CAVIUM, LLC, and
`DELL INC.,1
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`Case IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`____________
`
`INTEL CORP. and CAVIUM, LLC,2
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`1 Cavium, Inc., which filed petitions in Cases IPR2018-00400 and IPR2018-
`00403 and Dell Inc., which filed petitions in IPR2018-01306 and IPR2018-
`01307, were joined as petitioners in IPR2018-00226 and IPR2018-00234,
`respectively. According to updated mandatory notices filed in the captioned
`proceedings, Cavium, Inc. has now been converted to Cavium, LLC. See,
`e.g., IPR2018-00226, Paper 28.
`
`2 Intel Corporation, which filed a petition in IPR2018-01352, was joined as a
`petitioner in IPR2018-00401.
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`IPR2018-00401 (Patent 7,945,699 B2)
`
`
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-00401 (Patent 7,945,699 B2)
`
`____________
`
`
`Before DANIEL N. FISHMAN and CHARLES J. BOUDREAU,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`BOUDREAU, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for Admission
`Pro Hac Vice of Sanford I. Weisburst
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Alacritech, Inc. filed an Unopposed Motion for
`
`Admission Pro Hac Vice of Sanford I. Weisburst in the above-captioned
`
`proceedings. IPR2018-00226, Paper 92; IPR2018-00234, Paper 82;
`
`IPR2018-00401, Paper 73 (collectively “Motions”). Patent Owner also filed
`
`Declarations of Mr. Weisburst in support of its Motions. IPR2018-00226,
`
`Ex. 2605; IPR2018-00234, Ex. 2605; IPR2018-00401, Ex. 2603
`
`(collectively, “Declarations”). The facts alleged in the Declarations comply
`
`with the requirements set forth in our representative Order authorizing
`
`motions for pro hac vice admission.
`
`The Motions represent that Petitioners do not oppose. Motions 2.
`
`We have reviewed the submissions and determined that the requirements of
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10 have been met and that there is good cause to admit
`
`Mr. Weisburst pro hac vice.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`IPR2018-00401 (Patent 7,945,699 B2)
`
`
`It is, therefore,
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motions for Admission
`
`Pro Hac Vice of Sanford I. Weisburst are granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weisburst will be 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 as lead counsel in the instant proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weisburst is to comply with the
`
`Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for
`
`Trials, as set forth in Title 37, Part 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations;
`
`and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Weisburst is subject to the USPTO
`
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq. and
`
`the Office’s disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00226 (Patent 7,124,205 B2)
`IPR2018-00234 (Patent 8,805,948 B2)
`IPR2018-00401 (Patent 7,945,699 B2)
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Garland T. Stephens
`Jeremy Jason Lang
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
`Garland.stephens@weil.com
`Jason.lang@weil.com
`
`David Xue
`RIMON Law
`David.xue@rimonlaw.com
`
`Brady Cox
`ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`Brady.cox@alston.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`James M. Glass
`Joseph Paunovich
`Brian Mack
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
`jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`joepaunovich@quinnemanuel.com
`brianmack@quinnemanuel.com
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`