Patent Litigation Ethics

Federal Court DQs Law Firm in Patent Infringement Case, Rejecting Advance Conflict Waiver

A federal court in Alabama yesterday disqualified a law firm from representing a new client in a patent infringement case against a current firm client. In Southern Visions, LLP v. Red Diamond, Inc. (N.D. Ala. Feb. 26, 2019), the court held that Bradley Arant Boult Cummings (“Bradley”) was ethically barred from representing one client (Southern […]

Federal Court DQs Law Firm in Patent Infringement Case, Rejecting Advance Conflict Waiver Read More »

All In The Family: The Tricky Ethics Of Corporate Affiliate Conflicts

If you represent a corporation, do you represent all entities in the corporate family? For example, if you represent a parent company, does that mean you also represent the parent’s subsidiaries? Does it matter if a subsidiary is wholly-owned vs. partially owned? How about if you represent a subsidiary–does that mean you also represent its

All In The Family: The Tricky Ethics Of Corporate Affiliate Conflicts Read More »

Intellectual Ventures Prevails In Capital One Antitrust Suit

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

Intellectual Ventures Prevails In Capital One Antitrust Suit Read More »

Sue-And-Settle NPE Patent Litigation Tactics May Violate USPTO Ethics Rules

Non-practicing entities who engage in a pattern of filing numerous lawsuits without any intention of testing the merits, solely to extract low ball settlements, should take note that the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) takes a keen interest in such conduct.  A recent “exceptional case” decision in a patent case from federal court

Sue-And-Settle NPE Patent Litigation Tactics May Violate USPTO Ethics Rules Read More »

For Your Eyes Only: IP Atty’s Who Misuse Confidential Documents Face Sanctions, Discipline

Patent and other high technology litigation invariably involves the disclosure of highly confidential technical and financial information.  One of the first orders usually entered in such cases is a protective order, which enables parties to designate and disclose to a limited universe of people what the producing party considers to be confidential information.  Typically, protective

For Your Eyes Only: IP Atty’s Who Misuse Confidential Documents Face Sanctions, Discipline Read More »

Litigators Beware: Bad News Can Trigger USPTO Ethics Investigation

Bad news sells.  As the author Douglas Adams observed, “Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.” Take IP litigation, for example.  The mainstream IP media regularly reports on both allegations and court decisions regarding issues relating to attorney conduct–or alleged misconduct.

Litigators Beware: Bad News Can Trigger USPTO Ethics Investigation Read More »

USPTO Suspends Second Ex-Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months

It’s deja vu all over again: a second ex-Niro IP attorney has received an 18-month suspension from practice before the USPTO. Attorney Paul C. Gibbons, one of four attorneys from the now defunct Niro, Haller & Niro who were sanctioned for vexatious litigation arising from the firm’s representation of NPE Intellect Wireless, settled a disciplinary

USPTO Suspends Second Ex-Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months Read More »

CAFC Finds Patent Holder’s Position On Standing “Unreasonable” And “Remarkably Weak,” Affirms Atty Fees Award

On January 25, 2017, the Federal Circuit ruled a district court did not abuse its discretion when it awarded the prevailing party’s attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 based upon the losing party’s conduct with respect to responding to one particular issue in discovery. In National Oilwell Varco, L.P. v. Omron Oilfield & Marine,

CAFC Finds Patent Holder’s Position On Standing “Unreasonable” And “Remarkably Weak,” Affirms Atty Fees Award Read More »

Scroll to Top