Fake Law Firm Misappropriated Practitioners’ Identities To Deceive Inventors: Complaint

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Unauthorized Practice of Law2 Comments

From its website, “Intelligent Patent Services, LLC” (or IPS) appeared to have all of the trappings of a legitimate patent law firm.  The website included lots of content to back its self-proclaimed status as a “Patent Law Firm.”  The website boasted of supposed connections with legitimate organizations, claiming  its co-founders worked for Stanford University’s Office of Technology Licensing. Dak Steiert, … Read More

Intellectual Ventures Prevails In Capital One Antitrust Suit

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Antitrust litigation, District Court Litigation, Litigation Ethics, Patent litigation, Patent Litigation EthicsLeave a Comment

On Friday, a Maryland federal judge granted summary judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures on Capital One’s claims that IV’s acquisition and enforcement of patents relating to banking services violated U.S. antitrust law.  In a 53-page memorandum Opinion, Judge Paul W. Grimm found that IV’s conduct in obtaining and enforcing its patents was immune from antitrust liability based on the … Read More

OED Launches Diversion Program As Alternative To Traditional Attorney Discipline

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Discipline Diversion, OED, Office of Enrollment and Discipline, USPTO Ethics Investigation, USPTO OEDLeave a Comment

In a welcome response to the growing epidemic of drug and alcohol abuse among members of the legal profession, the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) of the USPTO announced today it has initiated a new disciplinary diversion program that focuses on treatment rather than punishment.  The OED’s Diversion Program, which will initially begin as a two-year “pilot program,” aligns … Read More

So These Two Lawyers Walk Into A Bar . . . .

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.ConfidentialityLeave a Comment

What sounds like the start of a joke is no laughing matter–at least not for two White House attorneys. As widely reported last week, Don McGahn and Ty Cobb, President Trump’s lawyers, were overheard at a popular D.C. restaurant discussing/arguing about a highly confidential matter concerning their client: namely how cooperative The White House should be with Robert Mueller’s investigation … Read More

Breadth Of PTO Ethics Opinion Could Alter How IP Firms Interact With Foreign Associates

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Communications, Competence, Conflicts of Interest, Patent Ethics, PTO Ethics Rules, Unauthorized Practice of LawLeave a Comment

This post is the last of a three-part series reviewing how the USPTO interprets and applies its ethics rules to IP practitioners who represent patent and trademark clients through non-practitioner intermediaries. Where Are We Now: Evolution of PTO Ethics Opinions Thirty years ago, the PTO issued (in 1987 and 1988) ethics opinions regarding very discrete questions concerning two aspects of … Read More

Better Late Than Never: PTO Updates, Expands Ethics Advice On Client Intermediaries

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Communications, Competence, Conflicts of Interest, Invention Promoters, Office of Enrollment and Discipline, Patent Ethics, PTO Ethics Decisions, Unauthorized Practice of LawLeave a Comment

This post is the second in a three-part series reviewing how the USPTO interprets and applies its ethics rules to U.S. patent and trademark practitioners who represent clients by working through non-practitioner client intermediaries. In re Mikhailova and USPTO’s Expanded Ethics Guidance Three decades after the OG Notices, the USPTO published a final order in the matter of In re … Read More

Are Your Firm’s Foreign Associate Practices Ethical?

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Communications, Competence, Conflicts of Interest, IP Ethics, Office of Enrollment and Discipline, Patent Ethics1 Comment

It is commonplace for IP law firms in the United States to receive referrals for patent and trademark application filing, prosecution, and related services from sources other than the actual client.  In one of the most common scenarios, patent and trademark services are directed to a U.S. IP law firm through an intermediary, such as a non-U.S. law firm or … Read More

Portus Drops Subject Matter Conflict Claim Against Kenyon; Alleges Firm’s Prosecution Malpractice Shortened Patent Term By 3+Years

Michael E. McCabe, Jr.Competence, IP Malpractice, Patent Prosecution MalpracticeLeave a Comment

For the past year, Portus Singapore Pte. Ltd. (“Portus”), a former client of the now-defunct Kenyon & Kenyon (“Kenyon”) law firm, has been trying to get a claim for legal malpractice to stick against its former IP counsel.   So far, Portus’ efforts have been unsuccessful.  On July 28, 2017, Portus took its third bite at the apple and filed another … Read More