IP: Bringing outside counsel in
In developing a patent portfolio in Silicon Valley, organizations rarely have adequate internal resources and instead turn to outside counsel to assist.
July 16, 2013 at 05:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
In developing a patent portfolio in Silicon Valley, organizations rarely have adequate internal resources and instead turn to outside counsel to assist. The level of reliance and type of involvement can vary, but generally the tasks assigned to outside counsel include invention harvesting, strategy development and patent prosecution. To execute these tasks at the highest level, outside counsel should not only have a full understanding of the organization's technology, but also other aspects of the organization, such as culture, short and long term goals, and pain points.
Patent practitioners are required to have a technical background. In theory, this background enables the outside counsel to sufficiently understand the technology for purposes of drafting and prosecuting a patent application. After meeting with the inventors for an invention disclosure meeting, the outside counsel will generally prepare a patent application that the inventors think discloses their invention. However, in practice, such an approach generally only produces an application that those in the tech industry would characterize as a minimal viable product. By investing some time and resources to bring their outside counsel into the organization, an organization can be rewarded with significantly improved work product, a stronger relationship between the firm and the in-house team, and a better working relationship between the outside counsel and the inventors.
A simple, yet valuable means of bringing outside counsel into the organization is through regular educational sessions. These sessions can focus on enabling outside counsel to gain a deep and continuing understanding of the organization's technology, culture and goals. In particular, technology sessions led by the organization's engineers can be invaluable in a variety of ways. First, the technology sessions increase outside counsel's understanding of the organization's technology. This not only leads to stronger patent applications that include more technical detail, but also applications that are better integrated with the organization's overall technology offerings. Second, the technology sessions aid in fostering a working relationship between outside counsel and the engineers. This can be particularly valuable for young start-ups or other organizations with engineers with less patent experience. It frequently comes as a surprise to engineers that patent practitioners have technical backgrounds and often were practicing engineers before turning to patent law. Because of this misunderstanding, engineers often hold back on technical details during disclosure sessions, and it can take time for outside counsel to gain their confidence. For engineers with extensive patent experience, the technology sessions can be valuable in fostering a strong relationship with a new team of outside counsel.
A more costly, but highly effective means of bringing outside counsel into the organization is through a secondment program. A secondment program allows the organization to bring one or more patent practitioners in-house on a limited basis. Many outside counsel, especially young associates, who do a significant amount of the patent drafting, have only a minimal understanding of the in-house role. The role of an in-house attorney is not generally taught in law school, so associates learn through interaction with their clients. This can lead to misaligned expectations on both sides of the relationship. During the secondment, the patent practitioner can perform the duties of an in-house counsel, including identifying and harvesting inventions, developing internal strategy and process, and interfacing with outside counsel. These duties enable the patent practitioner to be immersed in the organization's technology and culture. They are able to develop strong relationships inside the organization with both engineers and in-house counsel. Furthermore, the patent practitioner is able to better understand the expectations and the motivation for them. Through this exposure, the patent practitioner can return to the firm with a broader skill set and a better understanding of their client.
Regardless of the size of the organization or resources available, there are a variety of ways to bring the outside counsel into the organization. The role of outside counsel is to serve the needs of their client, but those needs are far better served when the outside counsel has a strong understanding of their client. The resources expended on these efforts will lead to a better relationship with outside counsel and a stronger patent portfolio.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFinancial Watchdog Alleges Walmart Forced Army of Gig-Worker Drivers to Receive Pay Through High-Fee Accounts
GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
In Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readGC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250