UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`HTC CORPORATION AND HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`v.
`
`JOE ANDREW SALAZAR,
`
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`Case IPR2018-00273
`
`Patent 5,802,467
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`DARIUSH KEYHANI UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`___________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________
`
`HTC CORPORATION AND HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`v.
`
`JOE ANDREW SALAZAR,
`
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`Case IPR2018-00273
`
`Patent 5,802,467
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION OF
`DARIUSH KEYHANI UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), Patent Owner Joe Andrew Salazar respectfully requests
`
`the pro hac vice admission of Dariush Keyhani in this proceeding. Petitioners do not oppose this
`
`motion.
`
`II.
`
`GOVERNING LAW
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) governs motions for pro hac vice admission in IPR proceedings and
`
`provides that
`
`The [USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal] Board 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 and to any other conditions as the Board
`may impose. For example, where the lead counsel is a registered practitioner, a
`motion to appear pro hac vice by counsel who is not a registered practitioner may
`be granted upon showing that counsel is an experienced litigating attorney and has
`an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.
`
`Motions for pro hac vice admission under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c) should be filed in accordance with
`
`the “Order Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” entered in Unified Patents, Inc. v.
`
`Parallel Iron, LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 (Oct. 15, 2013). In that Order, the Board explained
`
`that a motion for pro hac vice admission must (1) “[c]ontain a statement of facts showing there is
`
`good cause for the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding” and (2) “[b]e
`
`accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the individual seeking to appear attesting to the
`
`following:
`
`i.
`
`Membership in good standing of the Bar of at least one State or the District of
`
`Columbia;
`
`ii.
`
`No suspensions or disbarments from practice before any court or administrative
`
`body;
`
`1
`
`
`
`iii.
`
`No application for admission to practice before any court or administrative body
`
`ever denied;
`
`iv.
`
`v.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations imposed by any court or administrative body;
`
`The individual seeking to appear has read and will comply with the Office Patent
`
`Trial Practice Guide and 3 the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part
`
`42 of 37 C.F.R.;
`
`vi.
`
`The individual will be subject to the USPTO 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);
`
`vii.
`
`All other proceedings before the Office for which the individual has applied to
`
`appear pro hac vice in the last three (3) years; and
`
`viii.
`
`Familiarity with the subject matter at issue in the proceeding.”
`
`III.
`
`GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR ADMITTING MR. KEYHANI PRO HAC VICE IN
`THIS PROCEEDING
`
`“The Board 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 and to any other
`
`conditions as the Board may impose.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c). Patent Owner’s lead counsel, Jennifer
`
`Meredith, is a registered practitioner (Reg. No. 47,790).
`
`Further, based on the facts set forth in this motion, as supported by Mr. Keyhani’s
`
`Declaration, there is good cause to admit Mr. Keyhani pro hac vice in this proceeding. Mr.
`
`Keyhani
`
`is litigation counsel representing Patent Owner Joe Andrew Salazar in parallel
`
`proceedings in federal district court for infringement of the patent claims and also defending the
`
`validity of the claims for counterclaims for invalidity brought by Petitioner HTC Corporation. For
`
`over two years, Mr. Keyhani has been preparing and prosecuting this case and has been involved
`
`2
`
`
`
`consistently and substantively in this matter. He has read in detail and understands the challenged
`
`patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,802,467 (which covers a “Wireless and Wired Communications,
`
`Command, Control and Sensing System for Sound and/or Data Transmission and Reception”), and
`
`he has reviewed in detail all of the exhibits in this proceeding. During this time, Mr. Keyhani has
`
`studied the patent specification comprehensively and worked closely with the client/inventor to
`
`learn the patent and patent technology. He has also worked with technical experts in understanding
`
`and learning the technology and the claims of the patent. Additionally, Mr. Keyhani has worked
`
`closely and extensively with co-counsel Jennifer Meredith, who is an engineer.
`
`Thus, Mr. Keyhani has an established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in this
`
`proceeding as well as significant litigation experience and expertise. Accordingly, good cause
`
`exists to admit Mr. Keyhani pro hac vice in this proceeding.
`
`IV.
`
`STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS
`
`Based on the following facts, which are supported by the Declaration of Dariush Keyhani,
`
`filed concurrently with this motion, Patent Owner requests that Mr. Keyhani be admitted pro hac
`
`vice in this proceeding:
`
`i.
`
`Patent Owner’s lead counsel, Jennifer Meredith, is a registered practitioner (Reg.
`
`No. 47,790) (Exh. ¶ 13).
`
`ii.
`
`iii.
`
`Mr. Keyhani is a member of the law firm of Meredith & Keyhani, PLLC (id. ¶ 1).
`
`Mr. Keyhani is a member in good standing of the bar of the State of New Jersey.
`
`He is also admitted to the bars of the United States District Court for the Southern,
`
`Eastern, and Western Districts of New York, the United States District Court for
`
`New Jersey, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Federal Circuit Court of
`
`3
`
`
`
`Appeals. He is regularly admitted pro hac vice in federal courts throughout the
`
`United States (id. ¶ 2).
`
`iv.
`
`Mr. Keyhani is an experienced patent litigation attorney. He has been a patent
`
`litigation attorney for more than 15 years. He has been litigating patent cases during
`
`this entire time period and has been lead litigation and trial counsel in over two
`
`dozen patent infringement cases (id. ¶ 3).
`
`v.
`
`Mr. Keyhani is regularly admitted pro hac vice in federal courts throughout the
`
`United States (id. ¶ 5).
`
`vi.
`
`Mr. Keyhani is currently in good standing with all states, courts, and bars in which
`
`he is admitted (id. ¶ 6).
`
`vii. Mr. Keyhani has never been suspended or disbarred from practice before any court
`
`or administrative body (id. ¶ 7).
`
`viii. No application of Mr. Keyhani for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body has ever been denied (id. ¶ 8).
`
`ix.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations have ever been imposed against Mr. Keyhani
`
`by any court or administrative body (id. ¶ 9).
`
`x.
`
`Mr. Keyhani has read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide
`
`and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of 37 C.F.R. (id. ¶
`
`10).
`
`xi.
`
`Mr. Keyhani understands that he will be subject
`
`to the Office’s 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. ¶ 11).
`
`4
`
`
`
`xii. Mr. Keyhani applied for and received pro hac vice admission before the Board in
`
`Kawasaki Rail Car, Inc. v. Blair, IPR2017-01036 and IPR2017-00117. Mr.
`
`Keyhani applied for pro hac vice admission before the Board in Masabi, Ltd. v.
`
`Bytemark, Inc., IPR2017-01449 and it is currently pending. (id. ¶ 12).
`
`5
`
`
`
`V.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Patent Owner Joe Andrew Salazar respectfully requests that the
`
`Board grant pro hac vice admission to Dariush Keyhani in this proceeding.
`
`March 14, 2018
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Jennifer Meredith
`Jennifer Meredith
`Meredith & Keyhani, PLLC
`205 Main Street
`East Aurora, New York 14052
`Tel. (646) 546-5253
`Fax (212) 202-3819
`jmeredith@meredithkeyhani.com
`
`/s/ Dariush Keyhani
`Dariush Keyhani (DK-9673)
`Meredith & Keyhani, PLLC
`125 Park Avenue, 25th Floor
`New York, New York 10017
`Tel. (212) 760-0098
`Fax (212) 202-3819
`dkeyhani@meredithkeyhani.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`6
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on March 14, 2018, a complete and entire copy of the within
`MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION was emailed to the Petitioners by serving at the
`following addresses:
`
`B. Todd Patterson at tpatterson@pattersonsheridan.com
`Jerry R. Selinger at jselinger@pattersonsheridan.com
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Jennifer Meredith
`Jennifer Meredith
`Meredith & Keyhani, PLLC
`205 Main Street
`East Aurora, NY 14052
`Telephone: (646) 546-5253
`Facsimile: (212) 202-3819
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`7
`
`
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
