www.intelproplaw.com | www.intelproplaw.com |
Customer Number Practice, Chinese Walls, and Ethics[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Patent Forum ] [ FAQ ] Posted by David Hricik on February 22, 2000 at 05:31:55: Hello. I've been asked to write an article about patent prosecution ethics for the Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal. Among other things, I am going to focus on the attempts of firms to use "chinese walls" so that the firm may have Lawyer A prosecute patents without implicating Lawyer B's duty of disclosure or awareness of prior art, and so on. So, Lawyer Abbott could prosecute Nike's shoe patents while Lawyer Bob could prosecute Reebok's. One of the issues I am looking at is the PTO's Customer Number Practice -- where firms submit lists of lawyers authorized to prosecute a certain client's/customer of the PTO's patents. Is this a common practice, to your knowledge? Any information on the nature of its use, including (1) whether firms routinely use it; (2) whether any existing law indicates that every person associated with a customer number would fall within 1.56's duty of disclosure; or (3) any thing else (!) would be greatly appreciated. Do not send me privileged or confidential client information privately since that will waive any protection! David Hricik
|
www.intelproplaw.com |
The Intellectual Property Law Server Old Patent Forum |
www.intelproplaw.com |