Skip to content
  • About
  • Services
    • Phone Interview
    • Initial Meeting
    • Invention Analysis
    • Plan of Action
    • Invention Design
    • 2D/3D Illustrations
    • Invention Engineering
    • Patent Protection
    • Market Research
    • Manufacturers Search
    • Invention Brochures
    • Licensing & Royalties
  • Submit
  • Benefits
  • Blog
  • Contact
Menu
  • About
  • Services
    • Phone Interview
    • Initial Meeting
    • Invention Analysis
    • Plan of Action
    • Invention Design
    • 2D/3D Illustrations
    • Invention Engineering
    • Patent Protection
    • Market Research
    • Manufacturers Search
    • Invention Brochures
    • Licensing & Royalties
  • Submit
  • Benefits
  • Blog
  • Contact

972-402-0000

Irving, Texas

  • About
  • Services
    • Phone Interview
    • Initial Meeting
    • Invention Analysis
    • Plan of Action
    • Invention Design
    • 2D/3D Illustrations
    • Invention Engineering
    • Patent Protection
    • Market Research
    • Manufacturers Search
    • Invention Brochures
    • Licensing & Royalties
  • Submit
  • Benefits
  • Blog
  • Contact
Menu
  • About
  • Services
    • Phone Interview
    • Initial Meeting
    • Invention Analysis
    • Plan of Action
    • Invention Design
    • 2D/3D Illustrations
    • Invention Engineering
    • Patent Protection
    • Market Research
    • Manufacturers Search
    • Invention Brochures
    • Licensing & Royalties
  • Submit
  • Benefits
  • Blog
  • Contact
Free Invention Analysis

Patent Attorneys Warn of Repercussions

  • September 21, 2015
Patent Attorneys Warn of Repercussions

If you’re a fan of legal drama television shows, like Law & Order and The Good Wife, you’re going to love following the real-life drama going on in Massachusetts. It’s so volatile that intellectual property attorneys are warning about repercussions of a verdict against the law firm involved in the case.

Let’s Set the Stage:

The parties involved are the Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner law firm and Christopher Maling, a former client of the law office.

The Issue:

Maling filed a malpractice lawsuit, claiming Finnegan represented him for six years before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) without telling him the law firm was also representing a larger competitor, Masunaga Optical Manufacturing Company, on a similar patent.

Maling was seeking a patent on a screwless eyeglass hinge. He said he spent several million dollars perfecting his invention, plus $100,000 more on legal fees. Maling said he might not have proceeded if Finnegan had revealed Masunaga’s patent application to him.

While Maling’s and Masunaga’s inventions are similar, they are not identical. According to the Finnegan law firm, a prior art search did not show Masunaga’s invention.

The law firm contends it did what Finnegan requested and secured four patents for his invention.

Finnegan actually secured patents for both parties, but Maling is claiming the competitor’s patent renders his useless.

The Outcome:

The case is before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In the fall of 2014, it sent out a request for friend of the court (amicus) briefs on whether simultaneously conducting patent prosecutions on similar inventions without obtaining client consent violates the state’s ethics rules.

Several law firms and the Boston Patent Law Association responded to the court’s request, pointing out that inventors would not agree to client consent because they hold their inventions highly confidential. Even the USPTO waits 18 months after the filing of a patent application before disclosing it.

They also pointed out that similar inventions would be difficult to define since inventors often apply for patents in the same field at the same time.

Patent attorneys throughout the U.S. say if Finnegan is found guilty of the malpractice charge, it could shake up the conflict of interest rules covering patent prosecution and significantly disrupt their practices.

According to patent lawyers and law firms specializing in intellectual property, a ruling in favor of Maling would create incentives favoring larger corporations over start-ups and individual inventors.

Such a ruling would mean law firms would have to choose only one client in a given field for patent prosecution, essentially putting large patent law firms out of business or limiting access to specialized patent attorneys.

In a brief authored by a group of large law firms, the attorneys noted the similarities of patent lawyers and copyright lawyers. They explained that copyright attorneys can represent two authors writing books on the same subject that may compete directly in the same market. Yet, the two authors’ legal interests are not directly affected.

Noteworthiness of the Case:

In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court stripped federal courts of jurisdiction over patent malpractice cases. This case is the first test of state ethics rules.

A ruling on the patent malpractice case is expected soon.

  • Patent Attorney, Patent Protection, Patents
Inventions
Tech

Latest Posts

New patent reveals Facebook is exploring a modular phone
New patent reveals Facebook is exploring a modular phone
Facebook is exploring new handheld gadget with interchangeable parts that could used like a smartphone or portable speaker, a new ...
Should the Patent and Trademark Office Be Allowed to Change Its Mind?
Should the Patent and Trademark Office Be Allowed to Change Its Mind?
A patent on one-click checkout? On a method for exercising a cat? On a lawn bag that looks like a ...
Provisional Patent Applications: To File or Not File
Provisional Patent Applications: To File or Not File
Since 1995, the United States has allowed patent applicants to file provisional applications as an alternative to filing non-provisional utility ...
Joint 3D scanning-3D printing device officially receives US patent
Joint 3D scanning-3D printing device officially receives US patent
Separate devices for 3D scanning and 3D printing could soon be a thing of the past, according to a new ...
Facebook seeks patent for payment system
Facebook seeks patent for payment system
Facebook has moved the country’s patent office seeking patent for its invention relating to a transactional payment system that allows ...
Practical Pointers for managing Patents
Practical Pointers for managing Patents
Adopting good house keeping practices is a prerequisite to efficient management of patents. To avoid costly mistakes while prosecuting and ...
Previous
Next
View all Posts

What's on Your Mind?

Submit your Idea for your Free
Patent Search Now.

FREE PATENT SEARCH
  • 972.402.0000
  • [email protected]

What's on Your Mind?

Submit your Idea for your Free
Patent Search Now.

FREE PATENT SEARCH
  • 972.402.0000
  • [email protected]

Give Us a Call

972.402.0000

Evaluate

  • Phone Interview
  • Initial Meeting
  • Invention Analysis
  • Plan of Action

Develop

  • Invention Design
  • 2D/3D Illustrations
  • Invention Engineering
  • Patent Protection

Launch

  • Market Research
  • Manufacturers Search
  • Invention Brochures
  • Licensing & Royalties

Address

6565 N.MacArthur Blvd, Irving, Texas 75039

Phone

972.402.0000

800.962.3032

972.402.0095

Email

[email protected]

Evaluate

  • Phone Interview
  • Office Meeting
  • Invention Analysis
  • Plan of Action

Develop

  • Invention Design
  • 2D/3D Illustrations
  • Invention Engineering
  • Patent Protection

Launch

  • Market Research
  • Manufacturers Search
  • Invention Brochures
  • Licensing & Royalties

Follow Us

Facebook-f Instagram Linkedin-in Pinterest-p Twitter
© 2022, Lonestar Patent Services, Inc.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Free Invention Analysis

×

Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)

This agreement keeps your idea safe between you and Lonestar Patent Services.

I understand that the product idea information I submit cannot be used, disclosed or sold without my express written permission. I also understand that all Lonestar Patent Services employees are required to sign an ethics and confidentiality agreement for my protection. I believe that I am the original inventor of the idea described herein. I authorize Lonestar Patent Services to review my idea and contact me in 3 to 5 business days with the results. I acknowledge that Lonestar Patent Services monitors and records telephone calls for quality assurance. I understand that Lonestar Patent Services does not promise any financial gain from the development of any new product idea.

By clicking the “submit” button below as my electronic signature, I expressly consent to being contacted about Lonestar Patent Services by phone call, auto-dialed phone call including prerecorded voice messages, text messages or email at any number or email address I provide. I understand that my consent is not a requirement for purchase of services.

Fee based service.