Malpractice in patent prosecution can be an expensive (very expensive) and time-consuming proposition. Defense costs alone can run well into the seven figures. No patent prosecutor or law firm wants to face that kind of exposure. On February 21, 2019, I will be presenting a 90-minute CLE webinar hosted by Strafford on best practices for […]
Patent Prosecution Malpractice: Minimizing the Risk of Claims Read More »
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
A recent patent malpractice action filed in federal court in New York against an IP firm raises once again the issue of subject matter conflicts between concurrent clients in prosecuting patent applications in a similar field of technology. The issue of subject matter conflicts in concurrent patent representation continues to be an area of significant
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected yesterday a now defunct Virginia IP firm’s attempt to rely on 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the Supreme Court’s Alice decision as a defense to an $8 million damages award arising from the firm’s negligence in handling a client’s patent application. Protostorm, LLC v.
Appeals Court Rejects Belated Alice Defense, Affirms $8 Million Patent Malpractice Award Read More »
