A former female colleague asked me once why nearly all of my clients are men. Frankly, I had never given the matter any thought. It took me awhile even to accept my colleague’s conclusion that nearly all of my clients were, in fact, of the male variety. So I pulled out my list of clients […]
Is Mommy More Ethical Than Daddy? Read More »
The only time a patent attorney or agent ever wants to hear from the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline is when they are admitted to the Patent Bar and issued a registration number. Other than that, no news is good news. So if an envelope arrives from the OED (certified mail, return receipt requested),
You Just Received An OED Bar Grievance. Now What? Read More »
A recent disciplinary decision published by the USPTO Director illustrates a serious flaw in the Office’s rules governing reciprocal discipline. In re Sanjeev Kumar Dhand, D2016-17 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 16, 2016). California Discipline The factual background of the Dhand case is eerily similar to our post from yesterday (link here). This matter involves California-based patent
USPTO Reciprocal Discipline Case Illustrates Flaw In Rules Read More »
Each year, a number of patent and trademark practitioners agree to exclusion from the USPTO rather than face an OED ethics investigation or USPTO disciplinary action. While not always the case, such consent exclusions usually involve very serious–and often criminal–practitioner misconduct. One such matter is the case of former patent attorney David N. Caracappa. See In
USPTO Disbars Siemens’ Outside Patent Atty For $2.5M Billing Fraud Read More »
“As long as the world is turning and spinning, we’re gonna be dizzy and we’re gonna make mistakes” — Mel Brooks In bar disciplinary proceedings, the word “mistake” is often used either to explain, describe, or defend against, a charge of alleged unethical behavior. But is it unethical for an attorney to make an “honest
On July 1, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in RPX Corp. v. Applications in Internet Time LLC, IPR2015-01750, 01751 & 01752, ordered patent owner Applications in Internet Time (AIT) to pay petitioner RPX Corp. $13,500 in attorney’s fees as a sanction for violating the Board’s protective order. The Board found sanctions were warranted
PTAB Awards Attorneys’ Fees As Sanction For Protective Order Violation Read More »
A federal district judge has dismissed a trademark lawyer’s complaint alleging that the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline’s (“OED’s) investigation of him violated his rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that dismissal of his federal complaint was appropriate because the matters raised in the complaint are
TM Lawyer’s Attack on Constitutionality of OED Investigation Dismissed–For Now Read More »
A patent attorney who was excluded from the USPTO has appealed to the Federal Circuit. By way of background, on July 15, 2015, the USPTO Director entered an order excluding Richard Polidi from practice before the Office. The USPTO Director’s disciplinary action came after the Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) filed
Excluded Patent Attorney Appeals To Federal Circuit Read More »
