ITC Sanctions

Quoted in Law360: “$32M Dentons Verdict Could Put Vereins In The Crosshairs”

On February 25, 2020, Michael E. McCabe, Jr. was quoted in Law360 (including the lead story in IP360 and Legal Ethics360), in an article entitled “$32M Dentons Verdict Could Put Vereins in the Crosshairs“ by Aebra Coe. The Law360 article addresses the ethical risks of the Swiss verein structure as it relates to conflicts of […]

Quoted in Law360: “$32M Dentons Verdict Could Put Vereins In The Crosshairs” Read More »

All In The Family: The Tricky Ethics Of Corporate Affiliate Conflicts

If you represent a corporation, do you represent all entities in the corporate family? For example, if you represent a parent company, does that mean you also represent the parent’s subsidiaries? Does it matter if a subsidiary is wholly-owned vs. partially owned? How about if you represent a subsidiary–does that mean you also represent its

All In The Family: The Tricky Ethics Of Corporate Affiliate Conflicts Read More »

CAFC Sanctions Patent Atty For Frivolous Appeal; Is USPTO Discipline Next?

The Federal Circuit on Friday affirmed a district court’s order imposing sanctions against a Colorado patent attorney and his patentee client for vexatious litigation.  Doubling down, the Federal Circuit imposed its own sanctions for what it says was a frivolous appeal.  See Walker v. Health International Corp., No. 15-1676 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 6, 2017).  The CAFC’s ruling opens the

CAFC Sanctions Patent Atty For Frivolous Appeal; Is USPTO Discipline Next? Read More »

Lawyer’s Courtroom Antics Draw One-Year Suspension; Bar Rejects “Stress of Litigation” Defense

A Washington State lawyer was suspended for one year following multiple instances of courtroom misbehavior and making a false report to the police.  See In re Kathryn B. Abele, Wash. Sup. Ct. (Aug. 27, 2015) (en banc). The string of misconduct began during a 13-day trial involving a contentious child custody dispute. During the trial,

Lawyer’s Courtroom Antics Draw One-Year Suspension; Bar Rejects “Stress of Litigation” Defense Read More »

Can IP Litigation Counsel Be Jointly Liable Or Ethically Disciplined For Their Clients’ Intentional Destruction Of Evidence?

On October 29, 2014, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued an order in Certain Opaque Polymers (Inv. No. 337-TA-883) granting a default judgment of trade secret misappropriation as a sanction for the respondent’s spoliation of electronic evidence and imposing sanctions of $1.9 million against the respondent and its counsel.  The joint liability determination raises troubling legal issues regarding the propriety

Can IP Litigation Counsel Be Jointly Liable Or Ethically Disciplined For Their Clients’ Intentional Destruction Of Evidence? Read More »

Can IP Litigation Counsel Be Jointly Liable Or Ethically Disciplined For Their Clients’ Intentional Destruction Of Evidence?

On October 29, 2014, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued an order in Certain Opaque Polymers (Inv. No. 337-TA-883) granting a default judgment of trade secret misappropriation as a sanction for the respondent’s spoliation of electronic evidence and imposing sanctions of $1.9 million against the respondent and its counsel.  The joint liability determination raises troubling legal issues regarding the

Can IP Litigation Counsel Be Jointly Liable Or Ethically Disciplined For Their Clients’ Intentional Destruction Of Evidence? Read More »

Scroll to Top