`571-272-7822
`
` Paper: 29
`
`Entered: September 20, 2018
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SUPERCELL OY,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GREE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case PGR2018-00008
`Patent 9,597,594 B2
`_______________
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM, TIMOTHY J. GOODSON, and
`AMANDA F. WIEKER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`KIM, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Geoffrey R. Miller
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008
`Patent 9,597,594 B2
`
`Petitioner moves to have Mr. Geoffrey R. Miller admitted pro hac
`
`vice in this proceeding. Paper 26 (“Motion”). Petitioner submitted a
`Declaration of Mr. Miller in support of this Motion. Ex. 1008
`(“Declaration”). Patent Owner did not oppose the Motion within the
`requisite time period.
`
`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”)).
`
`In the Motion, Petitioner states there is good cause for the Board to
`recognize Mr. Miller pro hac vice during this proceeding, because, inter
`alia, Mr. Miller has established familiarity with the subject matter at issue in
`this proceeding, at least partially by serving as a consulting attorney in a
`related, co-pending action before the Tokyo District Court involving the
`Japanese counterpart of U.S. Patent No. 9,597,594. Motion ¶ 5; Declaration
`¶ 11. Accordingly, Petitioner has established good cause for the admission
`of Mr. Miller pro hac vice. Mr. Miller will be permitted to serve as back-up
`counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008
`Patent 9,597,594 B2
`
`Upon review of the record, we note that a Power of Attorney in
`
`accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) has not been submitted for Mr. Miller.
`In view thereof, Petitioner’s Motion is conditionally granted, and is to be
`effective after Patent Owner files the aforementioned Power of Attorney.
`
`Accordingly, it is hereby:
`
`ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion is conditionally granted, provided
`that within seven (7) business days of the date of this order, Petitioner
`submits a Power of Attorney for Mr. Miller in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.10(b);
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall submit, within seven (7)
`business days of this order, an updated mandatory notice identifying
`Mr. Miller as back-up counsel in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner continue to have a registered
`practitioner serve as lead counsel in this proceeding, but that Mr. Miller is
`authorized to act as back-up counsel;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Miller is to 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
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008
`Patent 9,597,594 B2
`
`the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth in Part 42 of Title 37,
`Code of Federal Regulations;1 and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Miller is subject to the Office’s
`disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R. § 11.19(a), and to the USPTO
`Rules of Professional Conduct set forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et seq.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 The Declaration states that Mr. Miller 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 the Code of Federal Regulations.” Ex. 1008 ¶ 8
`(emphasis added). We note that the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide and
`the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials are set forth in part 42 of 37 C.F.R.
`We deem this harmless error.
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008
`Patent 9,597,594 B2
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Jennifer R. Bush
`Michael J. Sacksteder
`FENWICK@WEST LLP
`Jbush-ptab@fenwick.com
`msacksteder@fenwick.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`John C. Alemanni
`Andrew W. Rinehart
`Scott E. Kolassa
`KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
`jalemanni@kilpartricktownsend.com
`arinehart@kilpatricktownsend.com
`skolassa@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`