Patent work done by Pennie & Edmonds for an herbal supplement-maker in 1997 does not bar the New York firm from representing a third party suing its former client over the supplement’s name, a federal judge has ruled.
Southern District Chief Judge Thomas P. Griesa declined a motion to disqualify the 150-lawyer firm after noting substantial differences in the previous and current work and a “screen” erected between the trademark and patent lawyers handling it.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]