<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">My issue is the attorney
should not be putting on their "inventor" hat at all. If they see
an extension/improvement, they should put on their "interrogator"
hat and do their damnedest to get the inventor to acknowledge that
is part of their invention. I have done that and it may have been
easier to pull teeth, but eventually they come around. If they
won't and are adamant, then that is not their invention and that
is what you have been hired to protect - not the lawyer's
invention based upon their client's. Again, the difference is
highlighted with my example below. If the lawyer knows of a
trivial or straightforward substitution that is not really
inventive (e.g., merely replacing a mechanical part with the
electrical equivalent or vice versa, or certain software with its
hardware circuit equivalent or vice versa) that is O.K. and what
the lawyer is hired to apply their technical skills to do.<br>
<br>
I realize that there is an in-between grey zone where the
delineation between lawyer and inventor is not entirely clear -
and different lawyers will use different dividing lines
therewithin, but I try my damnedest to find a line that I can live
with</font><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"> within that
grey zone</font><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">, and
can ethically defend while doing right by the client, and stay on
what I perceive to be the non-inventor side of that line.<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-signature">
<style type="text/css">
span.c16 {color: #800000}
span.c15 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c14 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt; text-decoration: underline}
span.c13 {color: #0000FF; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt; text-decoration: underline}
span.c12 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c11 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c10 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c9 {color: #800000; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c8 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial}
span.c7 {color: #989898; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c6 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8pt}
span.c5 {font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10pt}
span.c4 {color: #656565; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 11pt}
span.c3 {color: #000080; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial}
span.c2 {font-size: 8pt}
span.c1 {color: #0000FF; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 12pt}
</style><span class="c1"><strong>Richard Straussman</strong></span><span
class="c3"><span class="c2"><strong><br>
</strong></span> </span><strong><span class="c4">Senior
Counsel</span><span class="c5"><strong><br>
</strong></span> <span class="c6">Registered Patent Attorney</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span></strong> <span class="c6">Member NY, NJ & CT Bars</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c7"><strong>. . . . . . . . . . . . . .</strong></span>
<span class="c8"></span> <span class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c9"><strong>Weitzman Law Offices, LLC</strong></span><span
class="c16"><span class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c9"><strong>Intellectual Property Law</strong></span><span
class="c9"><br>
</span> <span class="c4">425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 401</span><span
class="c5"><br>
</span> <span class="c4">Roseland, NJ 07068</span><span
class="c11"><br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>direct line</strong></span> <span
class="c6">973.403.9943<br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>main</strong></span> <span
class="c6">973.403.9940<br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>fax</strong></span><span
class="c12"></span> <span class="c6">973.403.9944</span><span
class="c11"><br>
</span> <span class="c12"><strong>e-mail</strong></span><span
class="c6"></span> <span class="c13"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rstraussman@weitzmanip.com">rstraussman@weitzmanip.com</a></span><span
class="c11"><br>
<br>
</span> <span class="c14"><strong><a
href="http://www.weitzmanip.com/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.weitzmanip.com</a><br>
</strong></span> <span class="c15"><br>
</span><br>
<br>
<br>
</span>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/10/2024 1:22 PM, David Boundy
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJwugqEEqR70tKhm0wdyic9eaUmXh4LO1eY1oMkuuVymQcGfrA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I disagree with Richard. <i>Solomon</i> doesn't come
right out and say it, but it's there a millimeter below the
surface -- the client hires the whole lawyer, not just part,
not the lawyer with the technological brain hemisphere
removed. <a
href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3060703343000303777"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3060703343000303777</a>
If you as the technologically trained lawyer see an
improvement, disclose it, and claim it. I would not name
myself inventor, but others could take a different view.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think <i>Solomon</i> says clearly that there's no
obligation to name yourself as an inventor. What more do you
(Mr Strassman) need?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The problems with naming yourself inventor are --</div>
<div> (a) it's almost certain to lead to a waiver of
privilege</div>
<div> (b) your likelihood of being deposed goes from very
low, only if there's already a plausibel basis for inequitable
conduct, to certain. And once you're in the hot seat, there
are very few limits on what you can be asked.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Weigh those two risks against -- what advantage?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at
12:40\u202fPM Richard Straussman via Patentpractice <<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> <font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">If the
Inventor's answer after trying to get recognition in
multiple ways (and not surprisingly, given his background)
answered, "Do you envision that this could be \u2026 ?" would
have been "Heck no. Never in a million years!" Then, in
my view, that should have been the end of it. The
attorney should not have contributed that entirely
different innovation. I agree that would be true
inventing and well outside of the attorney's role. <br>
<br>
That is in sharp contrast to a circumstance where, for
example, a part is linearly moved by a mechanical actuator
and the inventor (who knows nothing about electronics) is
asked whether a solenoid could be used in place of the
mechanical movement, but the attorney knows they are
interchangeable and it is a trivial, non-inventive, swap.
Irrespective of what the inventor says, I would include
the solenoid, or state something like, "while the linear
actuator is shown as a mechanical device, the important
aspect is the linear movement, not the device used to
supply it, so it is to be appreciated that suitable
electronic or other devices that can provide the same
linear movement can alternatively be used."<br>
<br>
</font>
<div> <span><strong>Richard Straussman</strong></span><span><span><strong><br>
</strong></span> </span><strong><span>Senior Counsel</span><span><strong><br>
</strong></span> <span>Registered Patent Attorney</span><span><br>
</span></strong> <span>Member NY, NJ & CT Bars</span><span><br>
</span> <span><strong>. . . . . . . . . . . . . .</strong></span>
<span></span> <span><br>
</span> <span><strong>Weitzman Law Offices, LLC</strong></span><span><span><br>
</span> <span><strong>Intellectual Property Law</strong></span><span><br>
</span> <span>425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 401</span><span><br>
</span> <span>Roseland, NJ 07068</span><span><br>
</span> <span><strong>direct line</strong></span> <span>973.403.9943<br>
</span> <span><strong>main</strong></span> <span>973.403.9940<br>
</span> <span><strong>fax</strong></span><span></span>
<span>973.403.9944</span><span><br>
</span> <span><strong>e-mail</strong></span><span></span>
<span><a href="mailto:rstraussman@weitzmanip.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">rstraussman@weitzmanip.com</a></span><span><br>
<br>
</span> <span><strong><a
href="http://www.weitzmanip.com/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.weitzmanip.com</a><br>
</strong></span> <span><br>
</span><br>
<br>
<br>
</span> </div>
<div>On 12/10/2024 12:25 PM, Patent Lawyer via
Patentpractice wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks all for the responses and
interesting discussion.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">First, I will follow David Boundy's
guidance.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But let me give a little more
context in light of some other responses.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In this case, the invention is
purely 100% mechanical. It relates to an improvement
of a device that has existed for over 100 years. The
inventor's expertise and background are all
mechanical. He has zero background in electrical or
computer-related technology.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The patent attorney has expertise
and qualifications in electrical and computer-related
technologies.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">During drafting, the patent
attorney recognized that the 100% purely mechanical
device could be combined with a particular type of
electrical device. This combination is useful. But
it was entirely out of the realm of the inventor's
knowledge or technical background. The inventor would
not have realized the problem, let alone contemplated
the solution. In this case, the patent attorney's
contribution was not "a particular
embodiment/application/combination \u2026 contemplated by
the inventors." The inventor's honest answer to " Do
you envision that this could be \u2026 ?" would have been
"Heck no. Never in a million years!"</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As to the question: "What's the
potential advantage of naming the attorney as an
inventor?"</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Well, what if ten years from now,
the invention makes a bazillion dollars, and the
attorney wants his share? Or maybe the patent
attorney's heirs want his share?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Or what if the inventor is in his
30s, and the patent attorney is 65 years old, and the
application can get special treatment in the USPTO?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">[I once took over the prosecution
of an application that named two inventors, father and
son. While the father had the right technical
qualifications, I was sure he was named just to get
the special "over 65" treatment in the USPTO.]</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Or what about all the arguments
made here a few weeks ago about over-inclusion of
inventors rather than under-inclusion? [Per Carl's
recent email]</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But again, I will follow Boundy's
advice.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">P.S. Last year, I had dinner with
an ex and an old client. I'd worked with him in
1994-95, and got him 5 or 6 patents. His invention
(at a small company) made the company a lot of money
through patent enforcement and licensing. At one
point in the dinner, he got very earnest and said he
had something to get off his chest. Something he had
felt bad about for almost 30 years. He said he always
felt I should have been named an inventor. The
breakthrough in the invention came from something I'd
asked during one of our initial meetings. It gave him
an insight that he'd not previously had, and it was
the way the invention was implemented and claimed. Had
I been named as an inventor, I would just have
assigned the invention to the client anyway. Maybe it
would have been nice to be named on those patents, but
that is just about vanity. I told him it was no big
deal and I still paid for dinner. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></p>
<div
style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentcolor currentcolor;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">From: </span></b><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black">Patentpractice
<a
href="mailto:patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com></a>
on behalf of Patentpractice Patentpractice <a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>Patentpractice Patentpractice <a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, December 10, 2024 at 10:05
AM<br>
<b>To: </b>Patentpractice Patentpractice <a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Cc: </b>David Boundy <a
href="mailto:PatentProcedure@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><PatentProcedure@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Patentpractice] Patent
lawyer as inventor on client's application?</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes. Exactly and emphatically.
Different facts and different case law leads to
different outcomes.</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Dec 10, 2024, 8:51 AM
Carl Oppedahl via Patentpractice <<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;border-style:none none none solid;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<p>While we are on this topic. It was just a few
weeks ago that many members of this listserv
piled on top of each other, urging to anyone who
would listen that if you had to make a mistake
with your inventor list, it absolutely was
better to commit the sin of misjoinder than
nonjoinder. That if you are going to make a
mistake with your inventor list, there are a
seemingly infinite number of risks and downsides
and traps for the unwary if your mistake were to
be in the direction of failing to include some
otherwise possibly deserving name on your
inventor list. That a mistake the other way
(perhaps including some name on the inventor
list that might arguably not belong there) was
by far the less risky, had virtually no
downsides, and did not give rise to traps for
the unwary.</p>
<p>And yet now (I have not been keeping close
score on this) it seems that many of the same
members of this listserv are urging that no
matter how deserving the attorney might be to
get included on the inventor list, the correct
next step is nonjoinder.</p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 12/10/2024 8:38 AM,
Jeffrey Semprebon via Patentpractice wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Where I've had this
issue arise has been where, while drafting
the application, I've seen either a way to
work around the narrower claims based on
the inventor's disclosed embodiments or a
way to accomplish the same functional
limitation with a simpler structure than
used by the inventors (or both). <br>
<br>
Suppose that the client likes whatever
modification/alternative well enough to
put it into a dependent claim, and then
during examination it turns out that such
limitation is needed to distinguish over
prior art found by the examiner. In that
case, does failing to name the
practitioner as inventor invite any risk
if the named inventors will have to
truthfully state during depositions that
the practitioner was the one who thought
of that limitation? </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Jeff</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Jeffrey E. Semprebon<br>
Registered Patent Agent (mechanical)
looking for remote work</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="mailto:jesemprebon@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jesemprebon@gmail.com</a><br>
72 Myrtle Street<br>
Claremont, New Hampshire 03743</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at
7:40\u202fAM David Boundy via Patentpractice
<<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let me stress
that. As far as I know, there are no
countervailing benefits to be had or
risks avoided by naming the
agent/attorney as inventor. It's 100%
downside. Don't do it.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Another experience,
I was not directly involved in the
case, but I was in-house counsel at
eSpeed during appeal phase. <a
href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11175138575348740529"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11175138575348740529</a>
(then look at the D Delaware cases).
The problem was that the lawyers (Fish
& Neave) mixed up who was wearing
which hat, between inventors, company
management, and the lawyers. That
metastasized into a comprehensive
subject matter waiver. And because of
that, a tiny little document was
produced, and that turned into
inequitable conduct, and losing the
case. eSpeed had had a monopoly in
its market. And then it didn't.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It's REALLY
important to understand role
pigeonholes or information
compartmentalization, and keep
everybody in their pigeonholes.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Dec 10,
2024 at 6:22\u202fAM David Boundy <<a
href="mailto:PatentProcedure@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">PatentProcedure@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I disagree with
Judith and Carl. It's a MISTAKE,
a potentially-catastrophic mistake
with no upside, for any lawyer to
name him/herself as an inventor,
in-house or outside. You're
almost guaranteeing a hole in the
privilege, and potentially a
subject matter waiver. Back in my
litigator days, one of my little
specialties was depositions of
attorneys. If you have a witness
that's a fact witness or some
issues, and the attorney for
others, oh man what a tasty target
rich environment. DON'T DO IT.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You'll find my
name on some of my early patents,
but not after I sat as guest of
honor or a couple depositions by
Cravath, Kirkland & Ellis, and
similar firms, and realized how
many of my defense counsel's
objections would not be possible
if I had been a named inventor.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I disagree with
David Hricik. His paper <a
href="https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol55/iss2/4/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">
https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol55/iss2/4/</a>
proceeds from these two sentences:</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On the one
occasion the Federal Circuit did
address this issue, ... the court
stated that as a matter of law,
practitioners can never be
inventors. </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Federal
Circuit was wrong.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">That's not the
way it works. When a panel
majority of people with black
robes, presidential appointments,
and Senate Confirmations say that
it is fine -- no error, no
statutory violation, just fine --
to not name lawyer as inventor,
well, that's the law.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is not a
close call. Just don't.</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Dec 9,
2024 at 11:19\u202fPM Judith S via
Patentpractice <<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree
that as outside counsel you
should never name yourself as
an inventor for a patent you
wrote.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But I've
had more than one in-house
counsel who contributed to the
invention when we were
discussing it in committee. I
think that's not a big issue,
if in-house counsel becomes an
inventor.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Judith</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Dec
9, 2024 at 12:40\u202fPM Suzannah
K. Sundby via Patentpractice
<<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I\u2019d
also question whether
the patent attorney is
truly a \u201cjoint\u201d
inventor, i.e., worked
in \u2018collaboration\u2019, etc.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Imho,
patent attorneys should
never <i>write
themselves in</i> as
an inventor. After all,
it is our job to write
what the inventors
envision is their
invention, not what we
think the inventors want
to invent.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If a
patent attorney has a
question as to whether a
particular
embodiment/application/combination
is contemplated by the
inventors and should
therefore be included as
a claim, the patent
attorney should ask as
the inventors a <i>leading</i>
question, e.g., Do you
envision that this could
be \u2026 ?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sometimes
they say something
that\u2019s a great idea or
yes, that\u2019s how it could
be implemented\u2026 I then
correct them and say it
is what I understood
from their own
disclosure and/or I
didn\u2019t know whether it
would work or not which
is why I asked, etc.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Suzannah
K. Sundby</a> <b>|</b>
Partner</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="http://www.canadylortz.com/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">canady
+ lortz LLP</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">1050
30th Street, NW</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Washington,
DC 20007</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">T:
202.486.8020</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">F:
202.540.8020</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="mailto:suzannah@canadylortz.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">suzannah@canadylortz.com</a></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="http://www.canadylortz.com/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.canadylortz.com</a></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Confidentiality
Notice: This message is
being sent by or on
behalf of a lawyer. It
is intended exclusively
for the individual or
entity to which it is
addressed. This
communication may
contain information that
is proprietary,
privileged or
confidential, or
otherwise legally exempt
from disclosure. If you
are not the named
addressee, you may not
read, print, retain,
copy, or disseminate
this message or any
part. If you have
received this message in
error, please notify the
sender immediately by
e-mail and delete all
copies of the message.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b>
Patentpractice <<a
href="mailto:patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>David
Boundy via
Patentpractice<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday,
December 9, 2024 1:52
PM<br>
<b>To:</b> For patent
practitioners. This is
not for laypersons to
seek legal advice.
<<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> David
Boundy <<a
href="mailto:PatentProcedure@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">PatentProcedure@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[Patentpractice]
Patent lawyer as
inventor on client's
application?</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">My
view is that you
should not name
yourself inventor
without a Really
Good Reason. Here
are the reasons
that you should
not name yourself
as inventor: </p>
<p>\u25cf If you are
merely the
attorney, not the
inventor, you are
unlikely to be
called for
deposition\u2014attorneys
generally don\u2019t
get deposed unless
there\u2019s some smell
of inequitable
conduct in the air
first.<a
href="#m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_81799952662547"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sup>[1]</sup></a> However, if you are a named
inventor, you <i>will</i>
be deposed. And
once you\u2019re in the
hot seat in your
role as inventor,
the scope of
questions that you
can be asked has
little bound,
including \u201cfishing
expedition\u201d
questions for
inequitable
conduct that
couldn\u2019t be asked
if you weren\u2019t
already there.<a
href="#m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_81799952662547"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sup>[2]</sup></a></p>
<p>\u25cf When a
statement of fact
made solely as <i>attorney
argument</i> is
erroneous without
intent, it\u2019s not
inequitable
conduct.<a
href="#m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_81799952662547"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sup>[3]</sup></a> However, if you are the
inventor, the same
argument could be
an <i>inventor\u2019s
statement</i>,
and that statement
might be evaluated
for inequitable
conduct on a far
different
standard.</p>
<p>\u25cf As a person
that is likely to
become a witness,
you are
disqualified from
representing the
client in any
litigation. The
disqualification
may extend to your
firm.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">While
the Federal
Circuit has not
explicitly blessed
the practice, it
has at least told
district courts
not to invalidate
such patents under
old § 102(f) (\u201cA
person shall be
entitled to a
patent unless \u2026 he
did not himself
invent the subject
matter sought to
be patented.\u201d),
nor to correct
inventorship under
§ 256:<a
href="#m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_81799952662547"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sup>[4]</sup></a></p>
<p>\u2026 An attorney\u2019s
professional
responsibility is
to assist his or
her client in
defining her
invention to
obtain, if
possible, a valid
patent with
maximum coverage.
An attorney
performing that
role should not be
a competitor of
the client,
asserting his
inventorship as a
result of
representing his
client. Thus, to
assert that proper
performance of the
attorney\u2019s role is
a ground for
invalidating the
patent constitutes
a failure to
understand the
proper role of the
patent attorney.</p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div
class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr
width="25%"
size="0"
align="center">
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div
class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr
width="25%"
size="0"
align="center">
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_6487588021621560798m_-3273223265054125256m_8179995266254743648m_-4972033052347162407m_-8700340141342876121m_-6441156188502376828gmail-ftn1">
<p> <sup>[1]</sup>
<i>Ring Plus
Inc v Cingular
Wireless Corp.</i>,
614 F.3d 1354,
___, 6 USPQ2d
1022, ___
(Fed. Cir.
2010)
(material
misstatement
in Background
was material
to inequitable
conduct, but
did not
establish
intent to
deceive);
Taltech Ltd v
Esquel Ents
Ltd., 604 F3d
1324, ___, 95
USPQ2d 1257,
___ (Fed. Cir.
2010)
(inequitable
conduct &
atty fees in
undisclosed
prior art,
atty
misstatement;
intent
inferred from
circumstance
& lack
evidence of
good faith).</p>
</div>
<div
id="m_6487588021621560798m_-3273223265054125256m_8179995266254743648m_-4972033052347162407m_-8700340141342876121m_-6441156188502376828gmail-ftn2">
<p> <sup>[2]</sup>
Exergen Corp v
Wal-Mart
Stores Inc.,
575 F3d 1312,
___, 91 USPQ2d
1656, ___
(Fed. Cir.
2009) (FRCP
9(b) pleading
of inequitable
conduct reqs
specific who,
what, when,
where and how,
including
facts implying
intent).</p>
</div>
<div
id="m_6487588021621560798m_-3273223265054125256m_8179995266254743648m_-4972033052347162407m_-8700340141342876121m_-6441156188502376828gmail-ftn3">
<p><a
name="m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_817999526625474"
moz-do-not-send="true"></a> <sup>[3]</sup> <i>Intirtool Ltd
v Texar Corp.</i>,
369 F3d 1289,
___, 70 USPQ2d
1780, ___
(Fed. Cir.
2004)
(inequitable
conduct of
faulty
prosecution
arguments); <i>Norian
Corp v Stryker
Corp.</i>, 363
F3d 1321, 70
USPQ2d 1508
(Fed. Cir.
2004)
(inequitable
conduct of
faulty
prosecution
arguments); <i>CFMT
Inc v Yieldup
Int\u2019l Corp.</i>,
349 F3d 1333,
___, 68 USPQ2d
1940, ___
(Fed. Cir.
2003)
(inequitable
conduct of
faulty
prosecution
arguments); <i>Transonic
Systems Inc v
Non-Invasive
Medical
Technologies
Corp.</i>, 75
Fed.Appx. 765
(Fed. Cir.
2003)
(unpublished)
(inequitable
conduct of
faulty
prosecution
arguments); <i>Gambro
Lundia AB v
Baxter
Healthcare
Corp</i>, 110
F3d 1573, ___,
42 USPQ2d
1378, ___
(Fed. Cir.
1997).</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div
class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr
width="25%"
size="0"
align="center">
</div>
</div>
<div
id="m_6487588021621560798m_-3273223265054125256m_8179995266254743648m_-4972033052347162407m_-8700340141342876121m_-6441156188502376828gmail-ftn1">
<p> <sup>[4]</sup>
<i>Solomon v.
Kimberly-Clark
Corp.</i>, 216
F.3d 1372,
1382, 55
USPQ2d 1279,
1285 (Fed.
Cir. 2000).</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On
Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at
1:40\u202fPM Carl
Oppedahl via
Patentpractice <<a
href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p>I have had this
happen half a
dozen times over
the years. I send
the standard email
"here are the
claims, please
look at them and
tell me if we have
named all of the
inventors" and
next thing you
know, I am told I
am a co-inventor.</p>
<p>When this
happens, I simply
sign a declaration
and asssignment,
record the
assignment, and
give it no further
thought.</p>
<p>Yes I suppose one
could concoct
situations where
(for example) a
malfeasant patent
attorney could
intentionally slip
a "not" into the
assignment, or
could
intentionally do
something or
another during
prosecution that
would somehow
favor the
attorney. To the
extent that one
decides that such
risks would need
to be somehow
addressed, yes one
cannot imagine any
approach other
than transferring
everything about
the case
(including the
assignment task)
to separate
counsel.</p>
<p>One imagines the
client would get
stuck paying lots
of money to new
counsel for them
to spend the time
needed gain
familiarity with
the file.</p>
<p>I guess I have
sort of assumed
that if I can be
trusted not to
screw over the
client in the
handling of the
file in general
(before I was
identified as a
co-inventor), I
ought to be able
to be trusted not
to screw over the
client in the
remaining tasks.
But you raise
valid questions
that I have never
thought about.</p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">On 12/9/2024 1:03 PM, Patent Lawyer via Patentpractice
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">What issues / concerns are there with a patent
attorney being
named an
inventor on
their client's
patent
application?</p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Assume that the attorney will assign all rights in the
invention to
the
client/applicant,
should the
attorney
advise them to
have someone
else handle
the
assignment? </p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Are there privilege issues? (In a communication with
the client,
who are you?
Attorney or
co-inventor?)</p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Does the patent attorney have to advise the PTO? Is
there a
conflict of
any sort?</p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--
<br>
Patentpractice
mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
-- </p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span>
<span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span><br>
</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a></p>
<p><a
href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><br>
</a></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a></p>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">David Boundy</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a
href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">+1
646.472.9737</a></p>
<p><b>Cambridge
Technology Law
LLC</b><br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a
href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">mailing address</p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Newton MA 02459</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
This
communication
is a
confidential
attorney-client
communication
intended only
for the person
named above or
an authorized
representative. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication
is strictly
prohibited,
whether by the
author or
recipients.
Any legal,
business or
tax
information
contained in
this
communication,
including
attachments
and
enclosures, is
not intended
as a thorough,
in-depth
analysis of
specific
issues, nor a
substitute for
a formal
opinion, nor
is it
sufficient to
avoid legal or
other adverse
consequences
to the
recipient.
Unless you are
the addressee
(or authorized
to receive for
the
addressee),
you may not
copy, use,
disclose or
distribute
this
communication
or attribute
to the Firm
any
information
contained in
this
communication.
If you have
received this
communication
in error,
please advise
the sender by
replying to
this message
or by
telephone, and
then promptly
delete it.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span>-- </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span>
<span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span><br>
</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a></p>
<p><a
href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><br>
</a></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a></p>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">David Boundy</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a
href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">+1
646.472.9737</a></p>
<p>Cambridge
Technology Law
LLC<br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a
href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">mailing address </p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Newton MA 02459</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
This
communication
is a
confidential
attorney-client
communication
intended only
for the person
named above or
an authorized
representative. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication
is strictly
prohibited,
whether by the
author or
recipients.
Any legal,
business or
tax
information
contained in
this
communication,
including
attachments
and
enclosures, is
not intended
as a thorough,
in-depth
analysis of
specific
issues, nor a
substitute for
a formal
opinion, nor
is it
sufficient to
avoid legal or
other adverse
consequences
to the
recipient.
Unless you are
the addressee
(or authorized
to receive for
the
addressee),
you may not
copy, use,
disclose or
distribute
this
communication
or attribute
to the Firm
any
information
contained in
this
communication.
If you have
received this
communication
in error,
please advise
the sender by
replying to
this message
or by
telephone, and
then promptly
delete it.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span>-- </span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span>
<span
style="font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none">Error! Filename not
specified.</span><br>
</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a></p>
<p><a
href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><br>
</a></p>
<p><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a></p>
<p><b><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">David Boundy</a></b></p>
<p><a
href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a
href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">+1
646.472.9737</a></p>
<p>Cambridge
Technology Law
LLC<br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a
href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">mailing address </p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Newton MA 02459</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><br>
This
communication
is a
confidential
attorney-client
communication
intended only
for the person
named above or
an authorized
representative. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication
is strictly
prohibited,
whether by the
author or
recipients.
Any legal,
business or
tax
information
contained in
this
communication,
including
attachments
and
enclosures, is
not intended
as a thorough,
in-depth
analysis of
specific
issues, nor a
substitute for
a formal
opinion, nor
is it
sufficient to
avoid legal or
other adverse
consequences
to the
recipient.
Unless you are
the addressee
(or authorized
to receive for
the
addressee),
you may not
copy, use,
disclose or
distribute
this
communication
or attribute
to the Firm
any
information
contained in
this
communication.
If you have
received this
communication
in error,
please advise
the sender by
replying to
this message
or by
telephone, and
then promptly
delete it.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- Patentpractice mailing list <a
href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br clear="all">
</div>
<br>
<span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:10pt"><font size="2"><b><span><span><span><span><span><span><span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></b></font></p>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,127,160);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:12px"><font
size="2"><b><a
border="0"
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
style="color:rgb(102,127,160);text-decoration:none;outline:none;background:transparent 0px 0px"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img alt=""
src="https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wRMgBgcdZCqTw68Gg6ihENvW6_y8dGBqYvnJwiaIyu6LO5a7IJ-cljKsueIE5uxXbT6s9MN5hE2lGU"
moz-do-not-send="true" width="73" height="92"> <img
alt="Cambridge Technology Law LLC"
src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/keynectup/PROFILE/9b92f0cd-ecec-44c8-8932-60e8dc63709f/thumbnail.jpg?1455027242552"
style="border-width: 0px; border-style: none; border-color: currentcolor; outline: 0px;"
moz-do-not-send="true" width="96" height="96" border="0"><br>
</a></b></font></p>
<font size="2"><b>
</b>
<p
style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt"><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">Listed as one of the
world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</span></a></p>
<p
style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt"><span
style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">
</span><a
href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:windowtext"><br>
</span></a></p>
<p
style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt"><a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="color:windowtext">Click
here to add me
to your
contacts.</span></a></p>
<b>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span
style="font-weight:700"></span></p>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,255)"><a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span style="font-weight:700">David
Boundy</span></a></span></p>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span
style="font-weight:700"></span></p>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span><span></span></span></p>
</b></font>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span><span><a
href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a
href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" value="+16464729737" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">+1 646.472.9737</a></span></span></p>
<p
style="margin:0px 0px 10px;color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif,Arial;font-size:14px"><span><span><span
style="font-weight:700">Cambridge Technology Law LLC</span></span><br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a
href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a><br>
</span></p>
mailing
address
<div>PO Box
590638<br>
</div>
<div>Newton
MA 02459<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="1"><span
style="line-height:150%;font-family:"Times New Roman""><br>
This
communication
is
a confidential
attorney-client communication intended only for the person named above
or an
authorized
representative.<span>
</span>Any
dissemination,
distribution,
or copying of
this
communication
is strictly
prohibited,
whether by the
author or
recipients.<span>
</span>Any
legal,
business or
tax
information
contained in
this
communication,
including
attachments
and
enclosures, is
not
intended as a
thorough,
in-depth
analysis of
specific
issues, nor a
substitute
for a formal
opinion, nor
is it
sufficient to
avoid legal or
other adverse
consequences
to the
recipient.
Unless you are
the addressee
(or authorized
to
receive for
the
addressee),
you may not
copy, use,
disclose or
distribute
this
communication
or attribute
to the Firm
any
information
contained in
this
communication.
If you have
received this
communication
in error,
please advise
the sender by
replying to
this message
or by
telephone, and
then promptly
delete it.</span></font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>