throbber
Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
`Paper: 18
`Date: December 20, 2022
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`EPIC GAMES, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`INGENIOSHARE, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`IPR2022-00202 (Patent 10,142,810 B2)
`IPR2022-00291 (Patent 10,708,727 B2)
`IPR2022-00294 and IPR2022-00295 (Patent 10,492,038 B2)1
`____________
`
`
`Before THU A. DANG, PATRICK M. BOUCHER, and
`STEVEN M. AMUNDSON, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`AMUNDSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Petitioner’s Motions
`for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Lindsey Y. Shi
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses the same issues in each proceeding. We exercise
`our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each proceeding. The
`proceedings have not been consolidated, and the parties are not permitted
`to use this caption.
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00202 (Patent 10,142,810 B2)
`IPR2022-00291 (Patent 10,708,727 B2)
`IPR2022-00294 and IPR2022-00295 (Patent 10,492,038 B2)
`
`
`On December 9, 2022, Petitioner filed a motion for pro hac vice
`admission of Lindsey Y. Shi in each of the above-identified proceedings
`(collectively “Motions”). Paper 17.2 Petitioner also a filed a declaration
`from Mr. Shi in support of each motion (collectively “Declarations”).
`Ex. 1043. 3 Patent Owner does not oppose the Motions. See Ex. 1043 ¶ 5.
`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, subject to the
`condition that lead counsel be a registered practitioner. The Board’s notice
`authorizing motions for pro hac vice admission requires 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 at 2 (citing Unified Patents, Inc. v. Parallel Iron,
`LLC, IPR2013-00639, Paper 7 (PTAB Oct. 15, 2013) (“Order – Authorizing
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission”)).
`Based on the facts set forth in the Motions and the accompanying
`Declarations, we conclude that Mr. Shi has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Petitioner in these proceedings, that Mr. Shi has
`demonstrated sufficient litigation experience and familiarity with the subject
`matter of these proceedings, and that Mr. Shi meets all other requirements
`for admission pro hac vice. Accordingly, Petitioner has established good
`cause for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Shi.
`
`
`2 We cite the paper filed in IPR2022-00202. Petitioner filed a similar paper
`in each of the above-listed proceedings.
`3 We cite the exhibit filed in IPR2022-00202. Petitioner filed a similar
`exhibit in each of the above-listed proceedings.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00202 (Patent 10,142,810 B2)
`IPR2022-00291 (Patent 10,708,727 B2)
`IPR2022-00294 and IPR2022-00295 (Patent 10,492,038 B2)
`
`
`Upon review of the record, however, we note that Powers of Attorney
`for Mr. Shi in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) have not been
`submitted. Hence, as set forth below, Petitioner’s Motions are conditionally
`granted, and are to be effective after Petitioner submits Powers of Attorney
`for Mr. Shi in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b).
`Additionally, Petitioner has not filed updated mandatory notices in
`these proceedings identifying Mr. Shi as back-up counsel. Thus, Petitioner
`must file updated mandatory notices identifying Mr. Shi as back-up counsel
`in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3).
`
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motions for pro hac vice admission of
`Lindsey Y. Shi are conditionally granted, provided that within seven (7)
`business days of the date of this order, Petitioner submits Powers of
`Attorney for Mr. Shi in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is to continue to have a
`registered practitioner represent it as lead counsel in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Shi is authorized to represent
`Petitioner as back-up counsel only in these proceedings;
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must file updated mandatory
`notices identifying Mr. Shi as back-up counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.8(b)(3);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Shi is to comply with the Patent Trial
`and Appeal Board’s Consolidated Trial Practice Guide4 (November 2019),
`
`
`4 Available at https://www.uspto.gov/TrialPracticeGuideConsolidated.
`3
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00202 (Patent 10,142,810 B2)
`IPR2022-00291 (Patent 10,708,727 B2)
`IPR2022-00294 and IPR2022-00295 (Patent 10,492,038 B2)
`
`and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of
`Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Shi shall be subject to the Office’s
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and the USPTO Rules
`of Professional Conduct under 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00202 (Patent 10,142,810 B2)
`IPR2022-00291 (Patent 10,708,727 B2)
`IPR2022-00294 and IPR2022-00295 (Patent 10,492,038 B2)
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`W. Todd Baker
`Yimeng Dou
`Lindsey Y. Shi
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`todd.baker@kirkland.com
`yimeng.dou@kirkland.com
`lindsey.shi@kirkland.com
`Epic_IngenioShare@kirkland.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Stephen R. Risley
`Cortney S. Alexander
`KENT & RISLEY LLC
`steverisley@kentrisley.com
`cortneyalexander@kentrisley.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket