Six 'GMP' Tips for On-Going IP Management
Forward-thinking in-house corporate counsel adopt "good manufacturing practice" for managing their ongoing IP responsibilities.
October 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM
8 minute read
In-house corporate counsel and managers are routinely involved with license agreements, acquisitions, mergers, investments and/or an IPO. All of these transactions will involve intellectual property due diligence—an audit to assess your company's IP assets. Forward-thinking in-house corporate counsel and managers adopt “GMP”—good manufacturing practice. Here, we will discuss six GMP tips for practicing ongoing IP management.
(1) Review employment and assignment agreements to ensure your company owns all the intellectual property rights.
GMP requires that your company ensure proper ownership of your IP rights. In a seminal case, Stanford v. Roche, the U.S. Supreme Court provided guidance regarding drafting of employment agreements to ensure that your company properly owns all inventions. Stanford v. Roche, 131 S. Ct. 2188 (2011).Specifically, the court found that an employment agreement that includes the term “agree to assign … [a] right, title and interest in” an invention is only a “mere promise to assign rights in the future” and thus, does not transfer rights in an invention from an employee to a company. Stanford, 131 S.Ct. at 2194, 2202. In contrast, the court held that an employment agreement that includes the term “will assign and do[es] hereby assign” an employee's “right, title and interest in [an invention]” effectively transfer rights in an invention from the employee to an employer. Stanford, 131 S.Ct. at 2202. Thus, under GMP, your company should frequently review employment agreements and patent assignments to confirm that the phrase “I hereby assign all right, title and interest” is included, in lieu of the phrase “I promise to assign all right, title and interest” or “I agree to assign all right, title and interest.”
This content has been archived.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 AllFirst-of-Its-Kind Parkinson’s Patch at Center of Fight Over FDA Approval of Generic Version
3 minute readIntellectual Property Lawyer of the Year Finalist: Ronald S. Bienstock
1 minute readMcCarter & English Acquires Connecticut IP Boutique Harrington & Smith
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
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