In opinions to clients, intellectual property lawyers face risks
Article Abstract:
Intellectual property lawyers should find out about clients' time and financial constraints when deciding the appropriate standard of care in researching and drafting an opinion. The standard of care must be enough for the client to prevail with an opinion-of-counsel defense in a patent infringement suit or to protect a client from liability for false statements or omissions under the securities laws. An in-house counsel may not have the necessary independence to render an opinion. No legal opinion can be given with total certainty and this must be attested to also.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Standard of care in intellectual property law opinions
Article Abstract:
Attorneys must follow the proper standard of care in giving intellectual property law opinions.This includes both the standard of care necessary to win a suit for patent infringement and that necessary to shield a client from liability under the federal securities laws forbidding false disclosure. Sufficient communication with the client should establish specific needs before an investigation proceeds. The scope of the investigation should be known by the client, and the opinion should be drafted to explain the degree of uncertainty.
Publication Name: Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0882-9098
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Questions regarding patent practice remain after the Supreme Court's decision that the court, rather than the jury, should determine a patent's scope
Article Abstract:
The US Supreme Court's decision in Markman v Westview dramatically affects patent litigation, making early, definitive judicial interpretations crucial and implying that a new appellate branch may be needed. That case turned on the definition of 'inventory,' and the resultant ruling gives judges authority and responsibility to determine the scope of a patent. Unresolved questions include how courts should interpret claims, what resources the court may use, and what appellate system is best.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Is innovation king at the antitrust agencies? The intellectual property guidelines five years later. Toward a flexible rule of reason
- Abstracts: Let your fingers do the talking; electronic mail can help lawyers stay in touch with clients. Six mistakes lawyers make; misadventures in technoland that needn't happen
- Abstracts: Suite harmony; protecting client confidentiality while you share space. Bad references: beware of ethical hazards when nonlawyers offer referral fees
- Abstracts: Questioning competence: mentally incapacitated clients still can tell their lawyers what to do. You can't take it with you; when can you restrict a former partner from practicing law?
- Abstracts: Injury to competitors is injury to competition: predatory pricing under state law. Efficiencies in merger cases: technological 'diffusion' as the cure for short-run monopoly pricing