[E-trademarks] [Ip-transactions] [Patentcenter] [Patentpractice] Chevron Has been overruled by the S.Ct.
Suzannah K. Sundby
suzannah at canadylortz.com
Fri Jun 28 17:34:21 EDT 2024
I have more faith in the ability to petition the courts for grievances than an Administrative State telling me to “suck it up, it is what it is”.
Much like what the FBI has been doing with seizures…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-fbi-took-an-innocent-womans-savings-linda-martin-fifth-amendment-forfeiture-us-private-vaults-338fa5c0?st=8y9z5we6dm50gso&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
“When the FBI took her life savings from a safe-deposit box during a 2021 raid of US Private Vaults in Beverly Hills, Calif., she … received a notice stating that the government wanted to forfeit her money.
The notice’s dense legalese pointed to the bureau’s statutory authority for forfeiting her property…
Confused, Ms. Martin took the first option the notice laid out: filing a petition with the FBI. She later discovered, however, that doing so conceded her property’s forfeitability, leaving it to the bureau to decide if it would give her life savings back as a matter of administrative grace.”
Here is the Petition notice: Ex.-A-Linda-Martin-Notice-June-10-2021_Redacted.pdf (ij.org)<https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Ex.-A-Linda-Martin-Notice-June-10-2021_Redacted.pdf>
So, if one files only a petition, and no one else files a claim, your petition will be decided by the seizing agency.
Here is the code/law that is cited: 28 CFR Part 9 | Forfeiture.gov<https://www.forfeiture.gov/cfr28cfr9.htm>
Releases. In addition to the contents of the petition for remission or mitigation set forth in paragraph (c) of this section, upon request of the agency, the petitioner shall also furnish the agency with an instrument executed by the titled or registered owner and any other known claimant of an interest in the property releasing interest in such property.
…
Ruling. Upon receipt of the petition and the agency report, the ruling official for the seizing agency shall review the petition and the report, if any, and shall rule on the merits of the petition. No hearing shall be held.
…
Only one request for reconsideration of a denial of a petition shall be considered.
So, the fine print on the petition essentially says by submitting a petition, you confirm your request to have the FBI return your seized property according to FBI’s rules and procedures and that the FBI only returns seized property if the FBI decides the property should be returned. And since one agrees to proceed with the FBI’s rules and procedures, one essentially waives their 4th Amendment rights.
Suzannah K. Sundby<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/> | Partner
canady + lortz LLP<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
1050 30th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20007
T: 202.486.8020
F: 202.540.8020
suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>
www.canadylortz.com<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
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.
From: David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 5:29 PM
To: David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>
Cc: Suzannah K. Sundby <suzannah at canadylortz.com>; For discussion of intellectual property practice on topics that do not easily fall within other listservs such as Patentpractice and e-Trademarks and Designs. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <ip-transactions at oppedahl-lists.com>; For bug reports, feature requests, and tips and tricks about Patent Center. <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>; For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>; for trademark practitioners <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>; Pete Sawicki <psawicki at wck.com>
Subject: Re: [Ip-transactions] [Patentcenter] [Patentpractice] Chevron Has been overruled by the S.Ct.
Another big difference -- agencies are required to either accommodate minority interests, if feasible -- or explain why not. Courts aren't. Courts don't gateher enough input to do the fine tuning and interest-balancing that agencies do through rulemaking.
Agencies are required to address Petitions for Rulemaking. Courts have to wait for case or controversy.
Again, that's the law as it applies to the rest of the executive branch. The administrative law ends at the front door on Dulaney St. Don't confuse the rest of the federal government with the cheating, self-interested %^&!@(#s in Alexandria.
I predict that it won't take long to realize that courts aren't all that good at being policy-makers.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:17 PM David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com<mailto:DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>> wrote:
That's a perfect example of how agencies under Chevron have been more democratic than (I predict) courts will be under Loper Bright. For an agency to issue such an interpretation, the agency had to observe notice-and-comment and all the other requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, and all those other laws that you see at the end of almost every NPRM, and it could only go forward with at least tacit blessing of the President. Most regs of that form have to go through multiple rounds, each modified to meet public concern, and it's only after multiple rounds of tuning that they issue as final rules.
In contrast, when courts interpret -- and they're just as capable of absurdity -- as a practical matter, there's no public participation at district court level, and the only way to have influence at either Circuit Court or Supreme Court is formal amicus brief, which is out of reach for almost everyone.
Be careful what you wish for, and be careful to compare apples to apples.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:07 PM Suzannah K. Sundby <suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>> wrote:
Imho, the decision reduces the risk of Govt tyranny… Federal Agencies interpreting statutory law in an absurd way that bypasses Congress and/or turns the purpose of a statute on its head… e.g., Title IX being interpreted to force schools to allow biological males in female sports.
Suzannah K. Sundby<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/> | Partner
canady + lortz LLP<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
1050 30th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20007
T: 202.486.8020
F: 202.540.8020
suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>
www.canadylortz.com<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
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.
From: Ip-transactions <ip-transactions-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:ip-transactions-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of David Boundy via Ip-transactions
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 12:57 PM
To: For bug reports, feature requests, and tips and tricks about Patent Center. <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>>; For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>>; for trademark practitioners <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>; listserv for IP transactions practitioners <ip-transactions at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:ip-transactions at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com<mailto:DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>>; Pete Sawicki <psawicki at wck.com<mailto:psawicki at wck.com>>
Subject: Re: [Ip-transactions] [Patentcenter] [Patentpractice] Chevron Has been overruled by the S.Ct.
Whew, that was a long read.
I EMPHATICALLY disagree that "This decision is a start towards a more democratic government!!" There are things to be said on both sides, but that statement is pure ignorance. Justice Kagan sums it up -- "A rule of judicial humility gives way to a rule of judicial hubris." Executive branch bureaucrats have some political accountability, and work from records that are thousands to hundreds of thousands of pages. Judges don't. (Yesterday, Justice Alito in Moyle patted himself on the back for mastering a record of 1300 pages and a couple hours of oral argument. If an agency had made a major decision on such a thin record, it'd be arbitrary and capricious.)
On balance, I think Justice Kagan looked more carefully at the statutory text and history, looked at a lot more of the practical consequences, thought more carefully, and exercised more judgment. Kagan notes how Chevron has narrowed since its high-water mark in the late 1990s -- I agree, back then, it was a real problem. But it self-corrected. (Her explanation is darn close to my brief https://ssrn.com/abstract=4520183 ) I suggest reading her dissent (starting at page 82) first, then read the majority -- the majority's willful blindness is pretty apparent if you read Kagan first. (I did it the conventional way, but I was deeply steeped in the case, so I could see my "magical thinking" flashers going off as I read Roberts. If you're not an administrative law expert, read Kagan first.)
There are two classes to whom Loper Bright will be genuinely beneficial.
First, litigators. Justice Roberts has really underestimated the amount of uncertainty and re-litigation this is going to bring.
Second, patent and trademark lawyers. The Patent Office is a special case -- Congress gave the PTO and its senior executives motivations to cheat that don't apply to any other part of the executive branch. We need to remember that the level of disrespect the PTO shows to the law is not pervasive throughout the government. No other agency has the same incentives to tell the law to go to hell.
A couple people have asked me whether I think this affects the Chestek case. Maybe way at the margins, but I don't see anything direct.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 11:17 AM Pete Sawicki via Patentcenter <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
This decision is a start towards a more democratic government!!
Best Regards,
Z. Peter Sawicki
Westman, Champlin and Koehler, P.A.
Suite 1100
121 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Direct Dial: 612-330-0581
Cell: 612-418-9989
Fax: 612-334-3312
Email: psawicki at wck.com<mailto:psawicki at wck.com>
Website: www.wck.com<http://www.wck.com/>
Skype: Z.Peter.Sawicki
Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/zpetersawicki<http://www.linkedin.com/in/zpetersawicki>
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wG8mbA9x-8DoNksFnCpNiUbIda5kHOLJk-8yRzSXtzhx7RdcbzZqFzCZK4PJNuYk1Sev0SZWZw4mKj]
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4yCRAJRwZCiYeOPAMzh1YoCWhxXbvPEe4KLr0MnqFT3blDhfIzVTPdGtJ-7AUEHdeJd0JPeoW4]
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wyAQlAwHwd31folBduf-bLKYd0SpEL0W2ota_ADnvSyyMcv7kuIwn4HmN_1y7b86Rldf2ax1Q]
WARNING: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged or confidential. It is intended only for the above identified recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please forward this transmission to the author. Please delete this transmission and all copies. Thank you.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:13 AM Suzannah K. Sundby via Patentcenter <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
Well, for example, with all their ‘interpretations’ that they claim give then the authority to enact, e.g., their proposed terminal disclaimer rules, IDS rules, etc., we can send comments to their proposed rulemaking and simply state that the USPTO has no authority to do so and slap a copy SCOTUS’ decision thereto the comment letter.
Suzannah K. Sundby<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/> | Partner
canady + lortz LLP<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
1050 30th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20007
T: 202.486.8020
F: 202.540.8020
suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>
www.canadylortz.com<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
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.
From: Patentcenter <patentcenter-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Dan Feigelson via Patentcenter
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 10:59 AM
To: For bug reports, feature requests, and tips and tricks about Patent Center. <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Dan Feigelson <djf at iliplaw.com<mailto:djf at iliplaw.com>>
Subject: Re: [Patentcenter] [Patentpractice] Chevron Has been overruled by the S.Ct.
My response too.
Question is, how does this affect the PTO's current cheating?
And how does it affect Pam Chestek's cert petition?
DJF
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:54 PM Suzannah K. Sundby via Patentcenter <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
YAHOO!
Suzannah K. Sundby<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/1cN6ac6Up__LhkRGoN1yCWTV3E3jqrrwtsmH3WKQwAGkcleksjsFN2SnBMg2jdL6H5NX8xB5povUqXUtthrBTvnUeMADmC8pLiTqA7rguloQOZDfDYrYvhGdZocnYkprjzdKK91DHW3cdt9AJouTfPWZ-x34r5Vc3E7cBwsR7zy38oycP-3oN5NKsKUlD8hd-TGXbCY3TqOqg_YUJQoevzQIjP2HydKQ_ppVylAeUmPuupooTotm-olSN_R34syVzusOFX2rx8_QiAMBwHj-_rrBmXoYfTw0StEtxabxTI4> | Partner
canady + lortz LLP<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/tNfNWdfClsQXsbnKGPnDX85oAmCPji4f4b79synl_SeYTGCfmnKvYUKUb1r4YXuJ_5_vydCL5-o0cWIPEsRhHpbnvdxa5r2mhf8AXt6T9yFoiTzPepuUTtwBK6qr3mPi2S7dp31zh-H59EDIY9PevWcbmhGn75qBDxJuA5igAtN9WrjM-kKgQcKvtRKmutoaOdB6JcQz8A1ZNzxPgb51d0tF_xY54RwmBp-iEqs4y_1RyO5K6dj9tYyu1VpxlIcSkXtDmftK2uTykjrvIR_eidealhM>
1050 30th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20007
T: 202.486.8020
F: 202.540.8020
suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>
www.canadylortz.com<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/T9OO9tXyKotP1hS1BpBZ0EcmeZn4iCz5WjpDBOOBr5ugINrR4IVMKpFg_3KP0veR7FYCTvJqwDLBi30gDdlePV5-JKBpHkA5Ah_5Xw90rpeHzQIERyMSwxnZ3kz2ZjaYKEDsP07QeJLGStAAqQ5nA1Y-o8oVKeuyImJPuR5BwBRTZWWc25cc_Z6zI-bzzWDQ51jSQvVGn16O5gZXGW08Pl6nFEwzNCY0GOdovLLCicouzTL3RXhQH_m5VyEKIWYsm_XWKbBT6sSoT5buUWEzs1iLVjo>
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.
From: Patentcenter <patentcenter-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of David Boundy via Patentcenter
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 10:30 AM
To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: David Boundy <PatentProcedure at gmail.com<mailto:PatentProcedure at gmail.com>>; ip-transactions at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:ip-transactions at oppedahl-lists.com>; users of Patentcenter <patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>>; Oppedahl lists <E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Subject: Re: [Patentcenter] [Patentpractice] Chevron Has been overruled by the S.Ct.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/FHrrA7yfUxcL58mYAjyAssRu45Hnwsrx-lDymX1GNFmSGPtWbNyBHzcTfDXSkiRvfjs2bZhhO_IixXinMVlDL4zAFZW7RZYcy0NEZhtStfNyw_5FG7AFlJB_xc7zB2ov8c9joIPrZ0j5q59ELG16T1Rz-1ZdGLzCnErXT4tC8d6b7HG1IrdYJh2cMl9BKyxDSxoqzAnFGA4BO1ubjvmGGtFOfGJBLOF2LvGCqJJO5l7Lcg4L6nlIlkDgOvi0Tjm-2BEink6t6U-rz5t9STw42FExGJnw2_DTzu8e4H7kc7uLrb0gZPORDWT1yCMXMWAX0JxBDc8Ldt4>
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:24 AM Richard Straussman via Patentpractice <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
--
Richard Straussman
Senior Counsel
Registered Patent Attorney
Member NY, NJ & CT Bars
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Weitzman Law Offices, LLC
Intellectual Property Law
425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 401 (PLEASE NOTE THE SUITE CHANGE)
Roseland, NJ 07068
direct line 973.403.9943
main 973.403.9940
fax 973.403.9944
e-mail rstraussman at weitzmanip.com<mailto:rstraussman at weitzmanip.com>
http://www.weitzmanip.com<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/_3Gd9a1dtD_BBYoaMCl_OxwRep5SM8HU1vvGd2u-PiRPS2rmOb40eIZXLKHYAxCZR-abDY0TOxa9yH7j-oFL4SUbbU6qUpDAZPDy2FfEjfe6nUMUC01-SN7K1sV5ypXEc0x0EzfwG7TMSRsViN5N7lD2eXcDuhrvEEGjn3u5avqE_eyQqgz5ZB0ybIv2xZyrg-Cxe4ofgRjzPigk07vAmiuUS2KYCnwSm_GEb5rCqXTRMCFNQl30T9KNQH0-zpW5EqfeedpMdojSrO4ohfeyLxsZ6Q>
--
Patentpractice mailing list
Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/I2Yfru5N_V1eR-7AwaShqoiPOW41zlCR8dP6X8TLX5rNyRhWQNK0FXQZbCszaHhWpz9RzACOweTnfXlDdYkLlrdpgeB5Gm_lZhiFk0qoVnPbTo586OdNdaxsiVxPZLlBdaivg69O1v_DWWITSTdH2I9SGTPcn0dKBGFVszK8z18mQriCu3zUkAvEevibQp-yJRyPAJilbB6SvCVgIE4_rtqvv0CEeOzCFoEx4ofEqnSXk35OPPHc9O-zDn2xgO8DqieHYdE6eAatwHA99zDiMQqyI5vZKdsW0-znWD-czOyNkzoE1_buu4szqPDG3NfFkURegwi0N9s9AjCEky7yXxQ4YVV1oiGSQg>
--
[https://b0wr5.img.af.d.sendibt2.com/im/6250695/9f500053f35518252505dee74afa1eccd8d9a1baa53e4c7253d00e1b33d08c67.jpg?e=et-UAwALnE_cNllPmstvOaK0vOF7v_DAp91uF8skJPw9kBE7RYSKpRPbuuzQ59559Vz4FlxcLGpWDEglK0oE1lfihgLpOzGBy_0oFJ-Qr5PWc9j5Vd9HuNLybvR9IeBrXjLS4QMMsxwW16PZNBLHLvXR9yZDksrJC-2KRpaNHZve40HidIU_w_BEMILgxCdVChRtkLhkchPT8t6UvPoy8PYRN55lEIaVcqeSORZ-sqDGmCDJEpxxC8qMC2nOUAnDcNoUTbEGdEoMlhzQ53IlF-1et3d8kXFFBthHQEWPPA66PFFEuNLbKVYPh4LJIFwiDmzf5Z1wK0WCFWjiXpvN6u05tISVq2MQ-AOmAkrr54Se6-N5jPuM-uBYdGCj4Rv94ltbz_FAuf_T_cc4piVy6qvuSHHp] [Cambridge Technology Law LLC]
<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/zaS4i3w_Wr2EMCdAM5R6s2kg7HCNBnnEUXu--o2idhyHXLqvYId8sHDwrR0xb0O-qaq0DGZQWhZ-jo1zDBH7Va4BO_lP4N9K9gL74J6_N1wLOHAy_vuKgyPlTHZQc8yUO30EVUsXHZFJgwnJks9DW4VMu-5S0qY2G2nbQgsg6HLZb7FWycmi-omXCCxlOWMFCZjc0UFG1cDNn17hv_5qOIQfC-JJlRalLOVBAd3W-u_f8g5_wcoZtsNnp9WRzhIwxedBQkG9slUeFQY0v2oUnZ_gXygVjMpkwkZ7juM2tagx0yrsoYtsOoxUYDn607kZaeY5AkE-e3e1uFk>
Listed as one of the world's 300 leading intellectual property strategists<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/ZDqcnTWkRSXu292UcqifIarP9WjQa5mcuo6dWwF-JLZXwvRwLjq6C4RTMB8hKsCD791BfvOpxgROHu5v6wiByo_LP_L_eZYzx5JRt2cjlk4hFPHP1htFVYdhkiP3R2I5HY1jr2S9tTFVJTYVxsn7SRv0PAqbAZyCpy_kx9mWYXvTKeLjS1QS4qg_QTp9zDxnrVLiKBSWsv3yu-4koEPdNK8PDGiyyZCUKMy9NvDUd95vpoLlgi7PAq4k5DCm92JHqXq3hWwcOeYmTcvvGXbWXyel50UqpxcmgAGOJ-KLS4pXi2JE-b-NJvb_6wNt9HAwr5SH3g4uxsaK4MU>
Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/rCIoysBhQN5YMp9hugRg21boJsdtwJCFABylxUHC3mkIOlOnRI7WzPy_mmFfAUoCKdFt6u710alNdeZdC0jB83bSqPbLhHyEK_xYcDzFYj4FvpV6M0rWz2uG8vzh01zXp2Z_TNCkPgJPMbTZEm8ZDnXzT0q5M6Vl8pxT7jD7FX2mgd5_cR4feNQLUaTnZRs939W3Xk7g5LDOrDn-pG7gYKDjKTpHAD5tuTYeRquvheW5Ffb3n-FdxZrE_1bBttNtMJBrganYmhDKGYeIwRBrXj-GHmyM-fg2Ug>
<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/zSYl4WC3MnQMAEy4pQWB79umlsR2EwWeOmK3owmp40H5ngLZ1pe-xohyNJhFYoN-4KVq7CQYTOufF1r4ohxizmddy8Xin_9mdX_W93hA2q2_-2TXVqpbAr6Fs3iYnmVblEZV7NaoiFxI2wfa9jXX4UsEds-YlW9sFKKg58blw1igM6vyq0Fgt-rFMlxi_dSXpYYXLpq-Qeqwfz13bK_tYr-POBQA1sByQNc1umVrOLTg7KgGoOLbLoZqxCm7xcMrSlwsqEjbv0SqWi4Mph7LPaz3XbuvvbLJSGsFueHmgMZvzYM7cV9r-_al75aVZpiYO0A>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/aT3IijY5NjtiQoHvolEeYc471fqWRD03TjA76g33l2HDwkhQJgKJzFvQwByuVSTTqgldhzyHKDuFf9oehFGY936iRUBVZcsSgSDW2C31f63PJyVStAMx3EqO7Hr3i7R-dWK6xP8OSl7IaYEDuOu_JrHi8tEB5qDut4OitNsjssyiBZm13gwpDhzhMmLfJeyNjG9P7Wz_ntnkb99ioGo1nWw0M2cnsjTmup2EdHXOXDAiJ56hsTjfrUJDaS_budiqOw3orzyJHCkBi1gvVYw96H2OiCzLG3bbpdLpUCW6aZ7AA5wHtKUax_-B6WtviE2PUy4>
David Boundy<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/ho_yQxqF6YUcaw-LQ64nSgMBFLs86nhPAt-8tlYsd79JI-TnDxEge0Mpamro13JGQldh0haRZSNfMzJslH46ctokUKiK0LpP3omIA0CEiGo9LRvIRQN6y6RugsB1h75r-gtRlwvBB5OLKuCexSE_2cBuEV2oM6EO4k_cSWiYEGv54gqX1mtjfIS1nypPIxOjlCdMLvDI9QJzgNBWiNIqkHPcEh5D2yCaIYY93V4cWzdfdB2tcfzBbOtfTeNZTpJnefbTqgNwYXKcdzQURLxjgI20rLuDeCNGhUr_56OtZWkYH3WwODqdk3bg1T8XeHQzw9T5ubjF-SdEBpY>
DBoundy at cambridgetechlaw.com<mailto:dboundy at cambridgetechlaw.com> / +1 646.472.9737<tel:%2B1%206464729737>
Cambridge Technology Law LLC
686 Massachusetts Avenue #201, Cambridge MA 02139
http://www.CambridgeTechLaw.com<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/6FuAOfjl2quxn03aj_KcZYiJaGDWJsXWgbLUVleqdt-uf5KoYPXvOsl1twGDoTRhkpCkQP8UU9iodIOVP2k5wm5lQl_P_romCa_NiRBT3xKO8EyY629EZHtgZClue6auVo1TSt438QWi9u12XcDLa4kWxQNA5zzSe_G1ta0t_NrEaZwqZZHiW4gb7qGGBOcxKIcOk3sfdC74unxMH08wPpCmcVJP9wPxwkuV2WEDbZRtnggaQqFB7b38045RDyq8fi7LQmIotkd0YyXz6qg-9Wu0NuEcSw>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/DavidBoundy<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/XtvH4nDis3pI9qRovQRpJxzuvXalLa75XxtRfNSqTqOGsgk5LzVr_I8YFzFw8ZxOiS_DJ4kSXSb-viojdhGPdbBDaWKankon74GQVuMyH2MWmfdCNSXm7gKJgGhWozA_5Ad8yC_fYzSZymkpuGU3ZcmGe_jzd1_nUIrvtjLqXM_nAz3jpDCSL3WNIrtu2PxCFKJiufIhr6ycphI9zaNwymE5m0zk9e6N0hzvXox45MfM3u0NYIGw4l99UzRC55v1RCJ8IQDP6Hz9MbOvd1xXrH7sLbKbe06tyr76a6XGWZUk>
mailing address
PO Box 590638
Newton MA 02459
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.
--
Patentcenter mailing list
Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentcenter_oppedahl-lists.com<https://gcfagjf.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/x94b_WYyjqqnVlA-fopX0HuFlU4LPLe78pqLTMM3LU8o1i1tzuwlRNiRwPmVPsDGPDZvM2uZ6wFKGDUYp1tr8S2Q61u1FI2BBOsY6Pxgf9Z5AxGb03-ArODBZyPGIxKtqzTqzYUWxFVbZ6huHw4CGDIImKjNgbe6yA53Nd5s1ECGgDAbyM-cUtN3BbYT9iYMZbg93dFXhK-k5rVHC0qBwKm9UVHgxABoBnVtIKTfwpO0V0WWOiSRJRYea6_2Qfxnk7HZiLa_mdwhOPRBymJu_t9d0RZZ_l_NkzuQKyzW_XYR8Ytiru4k_xoc54lUq71bB9lZUHprfiRUoJs5uy2tLx-GZ-cH8NQ>
--
Patentcenter mailing list
Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentcenter_oppedahl-lists.com
--
Patentcenter mailing list
Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Patentcenter at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentcenter_oppedahl-lists.com
--
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wRMgBgcdZCqTw68Gg6ihENvW6_y8dGBqYvnJwiaIyu6LO5a7IJ-cljKsueIE5uxXbT6s9MN5hE2lGU]
<https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy>
David Boundy | Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC
P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA 02459
Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707
dboundy at potomaclaw.com<mailto:dboundy at potomaclaw.com> | www.potomaclaw.com<http://www.potomaclaw.com>
Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470<http://ssrn.com/author=2936470>
<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
--
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wRMgBgcdZCqTw68Gg6ihENvW6_y8dGBqYvnJwiaIyu6LO5a7IJ-cljKsueIE5uxXbT6s9MN5hE2lGU]
<https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy>
David Boundy | Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC
P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA 02459
Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707
dboundy at potomaclaw.com<mailto:dboundy at potomaclaw.com> | www.potomaclaw.com<http://www.potomaclaw.com>
Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470<http://ssrn.com/author=2936470>
<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
--
[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4wRMgBgcdZCqTw68Gg6ihENvW6_y8dGBqYvnJwiaIyu6LO5a7IJ-cljKsueIE5uxXbT6s9MN5hE2lGU]
<https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy>
David Boundy | Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC
P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA 02459
Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707
dboundy at potomaclaw.com<mailto:dboundy at potomaclaw.com> | www.potomaclaw.com<http://www.potomaclaw.com>
Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470<http://ssrn.com/author=2936470>
<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240628/58098c89/attachment.htm>
More information about the E-trademarks
mailing list