`571-272-7822
`
` Paper: 17
`
`Entered: June 15, 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)
`Case PGR2018-00029 (Patent 9,636,583 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00047 (Patent 9,770,659 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00055 (Patent 9,687,744 B2)1
`_______________
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM and LYNNE H. BROWNE,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conditionally Granting Patent Owner’s Unopposed Motion for Pro Hac Vice
`Admission of Mr. Steven D. Moore
`37 C.F.R. § 42.10
`
`
`1 This Order applies to each of the listed cases. We exercise our discretion
`to issue one Order to be filed in each case. The parties, however, are not
`authorized to use this style heading in subsequent papers.
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008 (Patent 9,597,594 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00029 (Patent 9,636,583 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00047 (Patent 9,770,659 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00055 (Patent 9,687,744 B2)
`
`Patent Owner moves to have Mr. Steven D. Moore admitted pro hac
`
`vice in this proceeding. Paper 21, 1–4 (“Motion”).2 Patent Owner’s
`unopposed motion is supported by a Declaration of Mr. Moore. Paper 21,
`5–7 (“Declaration”).3
`
`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
`Declaration, we conclude that Mr. Moore has sufficient legal and technical
`qualifications to represent Patent Owner in this proceeding, that Mr. Moore
`has demonstrated sufficient familiarity with the subject matter of this
`
`
`2 For purposes of expediency, we refer to the paper for PGR2018-00008.
`Patent Owner filed similar papers in PGR2018-00029, PGR2018-00047, and
`PGR2018-00055.
`3 Patent Owner is reminded that evidence, such as the Declaration, is to be
`submitted separately in the form of an exhibit. Patent Owner is also
`reminded that each exhibit must be uniquely numbered sequentially and
`must be appropriately labeled. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.63.
`2
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008 (Patent 9,597,594 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00029 (Patent 9,636,583 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00047 (Patent 9,770,659 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00055 (Patent 9,687,744 B2)
`
`proceeding, and that Patent Owner’s desire to include counsel from the
`corresponding district court proceeding is credible. See Declaration ¶¶ 10–
`12, see also Motion, 2–3. Accordingly, Patent Owner has established good
`cause for pro hac vice admission of Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore will be
`permitted to serve as back-up counsel only. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c).
`Upon further review of the record before us, we note that a Power of
`Attorney in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(b) has not been submitted for
`Mr. Moore. In view thereof, Patent Owner’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 Patent Owner’s Motion is conditionally granted,
`provided that within seven (7) business days of the date of this order, Patent
`Owner submits a Power of Attorney for Mr. Moore in accordance with 37
`C.F.R. § 42.10(b);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Patent Owner must continue to have a
`registered practitioner serve as lead counsel in this proceeding, but that Mr.
`Moore is authorized to act as back-up counsel;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Moore comply with the Office Patent
`Trial Practice Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials, as set forth
`in Title 37, Part 42, of the Code of Federal Regulations; and
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008 (Patent 9,597,594 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00029 (Patent 9,636,583 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00047 (Patent 9,770,659 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00055 (Patent 9,687,744 B2)
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Moore 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.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case PGR2018-00008 (Patent 9,597,594 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00029 (Patent 9,636,583 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00047 (Patent 9,770,659 B2)
`Case PGR2018-00055 (Patent 9,687,744 B2)
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Jennifer R. Bush
`Michael J. Sacksteder
`Fenwick & West LLP
`jbush-ptab@fenwick.com
`msacksteder@fenwick.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`John Alemanni
`Andrew Rinehart
`Scott Kolassa
`Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
`jalemanni@kilpatricktownsend.com
`arinehart@kilpatricktownsend.com
`skolassa@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
`
`5
`
`
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
