<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">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">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"><u></u>
<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">rstraussman@weitzmanip.com</a></span><span><br>
<br>
</span> <span><strong><a href="http://www.weitzmanip.com/" target="_blank">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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">First, I will follow David Boundy's
guidance.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But let me give a little more context in
light of some other responses.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The patent attorney has expertise and
qualifications in electrical and computer-related
technologies.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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!"<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As to the question: "What's the potential
advantage of naming the attorney as an inventor?"<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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?<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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?<u></u><u></u></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.]<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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]<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But again, I will follow Boundy's advice.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></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"><patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com></a> on
behalf of Patentpractice Patentpractice
<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"><patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>Patentpractice Patentpractice
<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"><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"><patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Cc: </b>David Boundy <a href="mailto:PatentProcedure@gmail.com" target="_blank"><PatentProcedure@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Patentpractice] Patent lawyer as
inventor on client's application?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes. Exactly and emphatically.
Different facts and different case law leads to different
outcomes.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 12/10/2024 8:38 AM, Jeffrey
Semprebon via Patentpractice wrote:<u></u><u></u></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?
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Jeff<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Jeffrey E. Semprebon<br>
Registered Patent Agent (mechanical) looking
for remote work<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:jesemprebon@gmail.com" target="_blank">jesemprebon@gmail.com</a><br>
72 Myrtle Street<br>
Claremont, New Hampshire 03743<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">
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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It's REALLY important to
understand role pigeonholes or information
compartmentalization, and keep everybody in
their pigeonholes.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">PatentProcedure@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">
https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol55/iss2/4/</a>
proceeds from these two sentences:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Federal Circuit was
wrong.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is not a close
call. Just don't.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Judith<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></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 ?<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/" target="_blank">Suzannah
K. Sundby</a>
<b>|</b> Partner<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.canadylortz.com/" target="_blank">canady
+ lortz LLP</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">1050 30th
Street, NW<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Washington,
DC 20007<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">T:
202.486.8020<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">F:
202.540.8020<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:suzannah@canadylortz.com" target="_blank">suzannah@canadylortz.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.canadylortz.com/" target="_blank">www.canadylortz.com</a><u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b>
Patentpractice <<a href="mailto:patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> David Boundy <<a href="mailto:PatentProcedure@gmail.com" target="_blank">PatentProcedure@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re:
[Patentpractice] Patent lawyer
as inventor on client's
application?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></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:
<u></u><u></u></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"><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"><sup>[2]</sup></a><u></u><u></u></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"><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.<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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"><sup>[4]</sup></a><u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></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).<u></u><u></u></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).<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div id="m_6487588021621560798m_-3273223265054125256m_8179995266254743648m_-4972033052347162407m_-8700340141342876121m_-6441156188502376828gmail-ftn3">
<p><a name="m_6487588021621560798_m_-3273223265054125256_m_817999526625474"></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).<u></u><u></u></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).<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></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">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>When this happens, I
simply sign a declaration
and asssignment, record
the assignment, and give
it no further thought.<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 12/9/2024
1:03 PM, Patent Lawyer
via Patentpractice
wrote:<u></u><u></u></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?<u></u><u></u></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?
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Are there
privilege issues? (In
a communication with
the client, who are
you? Attorney or
co-inventor?)<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Does the
patent attorney have
to advise the PTO? Is
there a conflict of
any sort?<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--
<br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
-- <u></u><u></u></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"><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><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank"><br>
</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><b><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">David Boundy</a></b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank">+1
646.472.9737</a><u></u><u></u></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">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">mailing
address<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Newton MA
02459<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span>-- </span><u></u><u></u></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"><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><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank"><br>
</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><b><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">David Boundy</a><u></u><u></u></b></p>
<p><a href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank">+1
646.472.9737</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Cambridge
Technology Law
LLC<br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">mailing address <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Newton MA 02459<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span>-- </span><u></u><u></u></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"><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><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">Listed as one of the world's 300
leading
intellectual
property
strategists</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470" target="_blank">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank"><br>
</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank">Click here to add me to your
contacts.</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><b><a href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy" target="_blank">David Boundy</a><u></u><u></u></b></p>
<p><a href="mailto:dboundy@cambridgetechlaw.com" target="_blank">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" target="_blank">+1
646.472.9737</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Cambridge
Technology Law
LLC<br>
686
Massachusetts
Avenue #201,
Cambridge MA
02139<br>
<a href="http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com" target="_blank">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">mailing address <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">PO Box 590638<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Newton MA 02459<u></u><u></u></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.<u></u><u></u></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">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- Patentpractice mailing list
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">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"><img alt="" height="92" width="73" src="https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wRMgBgcdZCqTw68Gg6ihENvW6_y8dGBqYvnJwiaIyu6LO5a7IJ-cljKsueIE5uxXbT6s9MN5hE2lGU"> <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;" height="96" border="0" width="96"><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"><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">Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a><a href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?" target="_blank"><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"><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"><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></p>
<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">DBoundy@cambridgetechlaw.com</a> / <a href="tel:%2B1%206464729737" value="+16464729737" target="_blank">+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">http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com</a><br><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy" target="_blank">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>