`571.272.7822
`
`
` Paper No. 9
` Entered: July 20, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`MICHIGAN MOTOR TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2020-00455
`Patent 7,116,081 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before NEIL T. POWELL, BARBARA A. PARVIS, and
`SCOTT B. HOWARD, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PARVIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of
`Robyn T. Williams
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00455
`Patent 7,116,081 B2
`
`
`On June 26, 2020, Patent Owner filed a motion requesting pro hac
`vice admission of Robyn T. Williams. Paper 8 (“Motion”). Patent Owner
`submitted an Affidavit from Ms. Williams in support of the Motion.1
`Ex. 2002. Petitioner has not filed an opposition.
`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. 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 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”)).
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motion and the accompanying
`Affidavit, we conclude that Ms. Williams has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this proceeding, and has
`demonstrated sufficient familiarity with the subject matter of this
`proceeding. See Ex. 2002 ¶ 9–10. Accordingly, Patent Owner has
`established good cause for pro hac vice admission of Ms. Williams.
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s Motion for pro hac vice admission of
`Robyn T. Williams is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner shall continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel for this proceeding, but
`
`
`1 Although entitled “Affidavit,” the supporting document is actually a
`properly executed declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.68.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00455
`Patent 7,116,081 B2
`
`
`that Ms. Williams is authorized to represent Patent Owner only as back-up
`counsel;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Williams comply with the Office
`Patent Trial Practice Guide (84 Fed. Reg. 64,280 (Nov. 21, 2019)), and the
`Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37, Code
`of Federal Regulations;2 and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Ms. Williams is 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
`
`
`2 The Affidavit declares that Ms. Williams has read and will comply with
`“the Board’s Rules of Practices for Trials set forth in part 42 of the C.F.R.”
`as opposed to Part 42 of Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations. Ex. 2002
`¶ 5. We deem this harmless error.
`3 The Affidavit declares that Ms. Williams will be subject to the “Code of
`Professional Responsibility,” rather than the Rules of Professional Conduct.
`Ex. 2002 ¶ 6. We deem this harmless error.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00455
`Patent 7,116,081 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`
`
`Michael Specht
`mspecht-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`Kyle Conklin
`kconklin-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`Daniel Yonan
`dyonan-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`Jason Fitzsimmons
`jfitzsimmons-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`Trevor O'Neill
`toneill-ptab@sternekessler.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`Timothy Devlin,
`Devlin Law Firm LLC
`tdevlin@devlinlawfirm.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
