uspto

USPTO Year in Review

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

Conflicts of Interest, IP Litigation Malpractice, IP Malpractice, ITC Sanctions, Legal Malpractice, Litigation Ethics, Litigation Ethics, Malpractice, Quotes, Speaking Engagements, trademark malpractice / By

On February 26, 2020, Michael E. McCabe, Jr. was quoted in the lead article published in Law360 (including IP Law360 and Legal Ethics360), entitled “$32M Dentons Verdict Could Put Vereins in the Crosshairs” by Aebra Coe. The article addresses the impact of a recent IP-related conflict-based legal malpractice verdict entered against Dentons.  The lawsuit arose […]

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

In re David J. Mahalek, Proc. No. D2016-31 (USPTO Dir. Jan. 27, 2017)

Misrepresentation, USPTO / By

Disposition:  Eighteen (18)-month suspension of patent attorney, pursuant to settlement agreement, arising from misconduct during course of litigation in which two patents were found to have been procured by inequitable conduct.  Final decision here. Summary:  A patent attorney was charged with ethical misconduct arising from his representation in two patent infringement litigations. The attorney was

In re David J. Mahalek, Proc. No. D2016-31 (USPTO Dir. Jan. 27, 2017) Read More »

In re Matthew Swyers, Proc. No. D2016-20 (USPTO Dir. Jan. 26, 2017)

Fail to Cooperate, Misrepresentation, UPL, USPTO / By

Disposition:  Exclusion on consent.  Final decision here. Summary:  A trademark practitioner was excluded on consent by the USPTO.  Previously, the practitioner had been the subject of a lengthy ethics investigation, which resulted in him filing a lawsuit in federal court to enjoin the investigation for allegedly violating his Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.  The practitioner’s federal

In re Matthew Swyers, Proc. No. D2016-20 (USPTO Dir. Jan. 26, 2017) Read More »

In re Kristofer Halvorson, Proc. No. D2017-01 (Jan. 10, 2017)

Fail to Communicate, Neglect, USPTO / By

Disposition: Six (6) month and one (1)-day suspension predicated upon identical discipline imposed by the Supreme Court of Arizona.  Final decision here. Summary: A patent attorney received a six (6) month and one (1)-day suspension as reciprocal discipline arising from discipline imposed in Arizona, in which he was found to have engaged to have neglected to

In re Kristofer Halvorson, Proc. No. D2017-01 (Jan. 10, 2017) Read More »

In re Kara Jane Jensen Zitnick, Proc. No. D2016-24 (USPTO Dir. Dec. 7, 2016)

Recordkeeping, USPTO / By

Disposition: Reciprocal sixty (60)-day suspension and two (2)-year period of probation after reinstatement, which was unopposed by practitioner and which was predicated upon identical discipline imposed by the Supreme Court of Minnesota.  Final decision here. Procedure: Reciprocal discipline pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 11.24. Related Case: In re Kara Jensen Zitnick, Case No. A15-0743 (Minn. Dec. 16,

In re Kara Jane Jensen Zitnick, Proc. No. D2016-24 (USPTO Dir. Dec. 7, 2016) Read More »

In re John Anthony Franczyk, Proc. No. D2016-22 (USPTO Dir. Dec. 5, 2016)

Fail to Cooperate, Neglect, USPTO / By

Disposition:  One-year suspension predicated upon identical discipline imposed by the Supreme Court of Illinois.  Final decision here. Summary:  A patent practitioner was suspended by the USPTO for one year as reciprocal discipline arising from upon a one-year suspension imposed by the Supreme Court of Illinois for failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in

In re John Anthony Franczyk, Proc. No. D2016-22 (USPTO Dir. Dec. 5, 2016) Read More »

In re Sanjeev Kumar Dhand, D2016-17 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 16, 2016)

Misrepresentation, USPTO / By

Disposition: One (1)-year suspension, fully stayed, and one (1)-year probation commencing on the date of the USPTO’s order, predicated upon identical discipline imposed by the Supreme Court of California. The USPTO Director rejected the practitioner’s request for nunc pro tunc treatment of probation term.  Final decision here. Summary: A patent attorney received a one (1)-year

In re Sanjeev Kumar Dhand, D2016-17 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 16, 2016) Read More »

In re Joseph C. Terzo, Proc. No. D2016-35 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 2, 2016)

Misrepresentation, Neglect, UPL, USPTO / By

Disposition: Exclusion on consent from practice before the USPTO arising from numerous ethics violations in handling multiple USPTO client matters.  Final decision here. Summary: A patent and trademark practitioner was excluded on consent following numerous allegations for ethical misconduct. The practitioner was charged with violating, inter alia, the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct proscribing failure

In re Joseph C. Terzo, Proc. No. D2016-35 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 2, 2016) Read More »

Scroll to Top