`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 10
`Entered: December 18, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`DTN, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FARMS TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2018-01412
`Patent 7,991,685 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before SCOTT C. WEIDENFELLER, Vice Chief Administrative Patent
`Judge, and GEORGE R. HOSKINS and FRANCES L. IPPOLITO,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`HOSKINS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Todd G. Vare and Deborah Pollack-Milgate
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01412
`Patent 7,991,685 B2
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a Motion for pro hac vice admission of Todd G.
`
`Vare and Deborah Pollack-Milgate (“Motion”) (Paper 9), accompanied by
`
`respective Declarations of Mr. Vare (Ex. 2006) and Ms. Pollack-Milgate
`
`(Ex. 2007) in support of the Motion. Petitioner has not opposed the Motion.
`
`For the reasons provided below, Patent Owner’s Motion is granted.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c), the Board may recognize counsel pro hac
`
`vice during a proceeding upon a showing of good cause. In authorizing a
`
`motion for pro hac vice admission, the Board requires the moving party to
`
`provide a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to
`
`recognize counsel pro hac vice and an affidavit or declaration of the
`
`individual seeking to appear in the proceeding. See Paper 3, 2 (citing
`
`Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron, LLC, Case IPR2013-00639 (PTAB
`
`Oct. 15, 2013) (Paper 7) (“Order – Authorizing Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`
`Admission”)) (“representative Order”).
`
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motion and the accompanying
`
`Declarations, we conclude that Mr. Vare and Ms. Pollack-Milgate have
`
`sufficient legal and technical qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this
`
`proceeding, and that Mr. Vare and Ms. Pollack-Milgate have demonstrated
`
`sufficient familiarity with the subject matter of this proceeding. See
`
`Exs. 2006, 2007. Accordingly, Patent Owner has established good cause for
`
`pro hac vice admission of Mr. Vare and Ms. Pollack-Milgate.
`
`
`
`
`
`It is, therefore,
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`
`Todd G. Vare and Deborah Pollack-Milgate is granted;
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01412
`Patent 7,991,685 B2
`
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner continue to have a
`
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding, but
`
`that Todd G. Vare and Deborah Pollack-Milgate are authorized to act as
`
`back-up counsel;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner must file a Power of
`
`Attorney for Ms. Pollack-Milgate under 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b), within ten
`
`(10) business days of the date of this Order;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner must file an updated
`
`Mandatory Notice identifying Ms. Pollack-Milgate as back-up counsel in
`
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Vare and Ms. Pollack-Milgate
`
`comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, as updated by the Office
`
`Patent Trial Practice Guide August 2018 Update, 83 Federal Register 39,989
`
`(Aug. 13, 2018), and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in
`
`Part 42 of 37 C.F.R.; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Vare and Ms. Pollack-Milgate are
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-01412
`Patent 7,991,685 B2
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`David Cabello
`James Hall
`Stephen Zinda
`BLANK ROME LLP
`DCabello@BlankRome.com
`JHall@BlankRome.com
`SZinda@BlankRome.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Joshua Larsen
`Yoojin Jung
`Barnes & Thornburg LLP
`joshua.larsen@btlaw.com
`kate.jung@btlaw.com
`
`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
