Angry Patent Lawyer Still Angry, Claims PatentlyO's Dennis Crouch Is Both A 'Dickhead' And Violated CFAA

from the andrew-schroeder,-have-you-met-charles-carreon? dept

Oh boy. Tim Cushing recently had a post here about a very angry patent lawyer, by the name of Andrew Schroeder. The story of his unbelievable rant filed with the patent office was originally highlighted over at PatentlyO, by Dennis Crouch, who most folks in the patent business are well aware of because of the blog and his regular commentary on patent-related issues. After Crouch published the rant, the story caught on in the press and it got a bit of coverage, including on our site as an example of how not to conduct business before the patent office. Everyone has bad days. And the best thing to do is to admit that you had a bad day and move on.

But that's apparently not how Andrew Schroeder rolls.

Our friends over at Above The Law have alerted us to the fact that Schroeder is back... and is he ever pissed off about people knowing just how pissed off he is. In what may be one of the worst-designed blogs ever made (and, warning, it's so badly designed that it doesn't even work at all if you have javascript turned off) Schroeder has announced that first, Dennis Crouch is the "Dickhead of the Year" for 2013 (I'm wondering who the past winners are) and (even better) that he believes Crouch violated the CFAA in finding and publishing his rant.

Both posts are filled with poorly designed graphics, mostly mocking Crouch, which Schroeder proudly takes credit for late in that first post. These aren't even "bad in an ironic way" graphics. They're just bad. In the way that someone is when they first discover how Photoshop works and suddenly thinks they're a master of design bad. But the rant is just as wacky. He never apologizes for the language he uses, beyond noting that it was "less than flattering." No, his focus is on the claim that his insane rant -- in which he accused a patent examiner of taking drugs, being drunk, not reading the patent application, of having to write with crayons and a variety of other euphemisms to suggest that the examiner has mental problems -- was a "confidential" communication between himself and the examiner, and revealing it involved both (a) illegal hacking into the USPTO site and (b) being a "dickhead" for thinking it might be entertaining to highlight his ranting.
One of the things I find fascinating about this whole ordeal is the fact that many of the articles written since Patentlyo’s blog post all assume that this was some sort of “PUBLIC” rant or tirade. Everyone assumes that this was some sort of “Open Letter” to the USPTO that I wrote to shame this particular Examiner (in fact, this was just between the Examiner, his Senior Examiner and me…and no one else). In fact, this was a confidential letter and anyone who tells you anything to the contrary is full of shit, I don’t give a fuck what they tell you.
Uh, no, it wasn't.

From there, Schroeder goes into a big rant about how terrible it is to use the USPTO's filing system. That may be true, but so what? That has nothing to do with the inappropriate nature of his rant. Schroeder, however, connects the dots to claim that because the USPTO site is so complicated, he would have thought that it would protect his "confidential" communications better (there's an assumption in there that's not quite true...). He also includes some totally gratuitous ad hominem attacks on Crouch, because no Schroeder rant is complete without resorting to sophomoric trash talking.

He further complains that Crouch appears to be "sympathizing with the Examiner!" because no one could possibly sympathize with a patent examiner. Now, we're generally no big fans of patent examiners around here, because we tend to think they approve all sorts of junk patents, but I think it's rather easy to sympathize with the recipient of Schroeder's rage rant. Of course, Schroeder hates examiners for the opposite reason we do. He insists they're not approving nearly enough patents, and that their default is to reject patents. In fact, he gives an anecdotal "side note" about some mythical patent examiner who has a 100% rejection rate. That's amusing, since (as we pointed out recently) in 2012, nearly 90% of all patent applications were eventually approved. And Schroeder thinks examiners are too quick to reject?

In the second post, Schroeder insists that as far as he can tell it's absolutely impossible that Crouch could have found his rant in the PAIR system, and therefore, he believes that Crouch hacked into the USPTO's computers and violated the CFAA.
I’m gonna have to crowdsource this one because I’ve been doing research and can’t seem to figure out how Dennis Crouch was able to access my account with the USPTO. It has always been my understanding that patent applications less than 18 months old and their office action responses are to remain confidential. I’m starting to think that Patentlyo’s Dennis Crouch just wants me to believe that it is common knowledge that you can access anyone’s records there at the USPTO. However, from my own research I have found no evidence whatsoever that it is possible. And more importantly, I DON’T EVEN KNOW IF HIS ACTIONS WERE EVEN LEGAL!

The more I think about it, the more likely it is that Dennis Crouch may have broken a whole bunch of laws. When it comes to cyber crimes there are state laws (one for where he lives, possibly where I live, and that of Alexandria, Virginia (USPTO).

And then of course there are Federal laws as well such as the CFAA (Computer Fraud & Abuse Act) which makes it a felony to hack and steal documents similar to what Dennis mother fucking menace may have done.
That one comes complete with a poorly executed graphic showing Crouch's head mixed in with the text "Computer Hacking is Cool" and pretending that this is a class that Crouch teaches at the University of Missouri Law School.

Randomly, at the end of the first blog post, Schroeder goes off on how proud he is of the hard work he puts into designing his websites:
You see, for the past several years I have taught myself how to build my own websites, everything…from A-Z. I can do HTML, the Videos, the graphics, the images, CSS, and even the SEO. And I think that I can build one hell of a website. For the past several years, I have had countless people call me out of the blue and ask me who built my website. When I reveal to them that it was me, they usually respond with something like, “No, really, who actually built your website?”

I love building websites. I get absorbed in it, and I can’t tell you how many times I have looked up at the clock to see “3:AM”, and wonder where the past 12 hours went. Some guys have video games, girls have shoe hunting expeditions, I have the website munchies. So, if any of you have gotten this far and think you need a website, go ahead and give me a call, and I’ll hook you up!
The website has to be seen to be believed. Not only does it not function without javascript, but the layout is ridiculous and confusing, the graphics don't line up, and (as mentioned) the graphic design is awful. So, not only can you get a patent lawyer who might start cursing you out and rant at you for not approving the patent he wanted you to approve, but he might start advertising his awful web design skills in the middle of it all. Wow. Here's a screenshot of one of the blog posts (each has their own "background" image that distracts from, well, everything.
Schroeder might do well to consider taking a deep breath before writing any more angry rants and maybe, just maybe, taking a class on web an graphic design.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:07pm

    OMG! Another of my idiot clones pops up!

    "have had countless people call me out of the blue"!!!

    I am NOT related in ANY known way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:16pm

    I like Pop-Tarts.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:17pm

    (b) being a "dickhead" for thinking it might be entertaining to highlight his ranting.

    Replace "dickhead" with "gentleman, scholar, and all-around great guy".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:17pm

    In the second post, Schroeder insists that as far as he can tell it's absolutely impossible that Crouch could have found his rant in the PAIR system, and therefore, he believes that Crouch hacked into the USPTO's computers and violated the CFAA.

    Mikey--

    You should get together with this guy. He's right on your wavelength. You can co-author posts about how President Clinton and Colbert violated the CFAA. Oh wait, you already did that one. Maybe the Dalai Lama did! Or Ghandi! Or the Pope! You guys could just pump out all kinds of FUD about random people violating the CFAA! It's a match made in heaven! I'm so happy for you two. Oh la la. I'm just so happy for ya.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:23pm

    Re:

    OMG! Maybe he can help you write more articles about how Aaron Swartz DIDN'T violate the CFAA! Lots of articles about how everyday people doing mundane things that are (SCARY!!!!!) felonies, and then LOTS and LOTS of articles about how Swartz didn't do anything wrong! Swartz couldn't violate the CFAA even if he tried, but people who are just checking their Twitter feed are felons! Yes! Oh, the possibilities! Accuse, accuse, accuse, accuse, accuse, accuse, and then DENY! Rinse and repeat. Common man = FELON!. Ooh, scary, scary stuff! Then purposeful hacker = saint!!! What felony? What hacking? What's that? It's awesome. This guy is so perfect for Team Techdirt. He'll fit right in with Marcus and Zachary and the Tims. What a brain trust you'll have. Yea!! You found your next hard-hitting TD FUD Packer!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Ferel (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:30pm

    Re: Re:

    Good God, man! Put that thing back in your pants. No one wants to see that in public.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Akari Mizunashi (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:40pm

    Re: OMG! Another of my idiot clones pops up!

    Father and son. Reunited.

    It's stories like this that bring a tear to my eye.

    But to be serious, ootb, you are just like this guy.

    To see you try and distance yourself makes me laugh.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Akari Mizunashi (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:41pm

    Re:

    Careful now! You may be breaking imaginary CFAA laws and we wouldn't want you to be his next target.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    testcore (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:45pm

    If he builds his own site(s)...

    Why is this the second line of most of the html files?

    "Delight is a Pixedelic work, by Consorzio Creativo on Wordpress platform | Manuel Masia (designer and developer)"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Gweskoyen, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:49pm

    Re: Re:

    Seek help.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Nigel (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:52pm

    whoa

    http://www.pixedelic.com/themes/delight/

    That is what its supposed to be doing lol... I will fire off a note to that fellow and see if it was actually purchased. Typically, stuff doesn't go completely off the rails like that unless its nulled.

    Its more work to screw that up that bad than it is to code it from scratch.

    Nigel

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Goober, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:53pm

    Flabbergasted

    I'm absolutely amazed that a patent attorney doesn't know that unless he requests otherwise, all patent applications become public after 18 months. Any patent prosecution (including office actions and their responses) after the 18 months are also public information and viewable within days of submission. How can a patent attorney not know this???

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 3:57pm

    Re: Re:

    Just talking about the CFAA laws on a computer is a violation of the CFAA laws. You might want to delete your comment before the internet police arri

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Beech, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:00pm

    In his defense, Crouch probably has violated the CFAA because at this point, hell, who hasn't? It's like impossible not to violate it in some fashion

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Chris Brand, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:01pm

    Re: Flabbergasted

    To be fair, he doesn't seem to talking about *after* 18 months:
    "It has always been my understanding that patent applications less than 18 months old and their office action responses are to remain confidential."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    CK20XX, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:04pm

    Thompson Effect? Carreon Effect? Schroeder Effect? There are too many possible names for what's at work here! How is anyone supposed to pick just one?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:04pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    I see what you d

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    radarmonkey (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:04pm

    Separated at birth?

    I honestly wonder if Andrew Schroeder is in anyway related to Paul "I wwebsite as on the internet" Christoforo?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:08pm

    What it is with people with strange names and this need to bully others?

    Schroeder is shredding his options here.
    He probably was a victim of bullies in his early years LoL

    "echo "Schroeder" | festival --tts
    echo "shredder" | festival --tts

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:13pm

    Who needs a cat... Schroeder's box....

    If we put Schroeder into a box with a poison pill with a variable release time, and we give him a cell phone with only web capabilities.

    Even when the web ranting stops, we have to assume, until opening the box, that Schroeder is both (alive and a douche) and (dead and still a dickhead).

    I propose we conduct this experiment at once just to be sure....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    DH's Love Child (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:16pm

    Just a thought...

    So, Schroeder publicly alleges that Crouch broke the law, hacked his account, etc... imagine the delicious irony if Crouch sued Schroeder for defamation and won.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:19pm

    Re:

    That is terribuhl man.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Zos (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:21pm

    Re:

    thank you, i was just paging down to ask where it had actually come from, i didn't see it in the story and it seemed like to easy a lay up to pass up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:37pm

    Re:

    My cat's breath smells like cat food.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    NoahVail (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:43pm

    It's really mean to make fun of the mentally ill, even when it's not.

    (You might have to squint really hard for that to make sense.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 4:55pm

    If anyone wants to really violate the CFAA:
    http://angelsharkwebsites.com/la-web-designer-blog-multimedia/wp-login.php

    Simple Wordpress page probably without modification, I'd suggest wpscan first.


    In all serious reality, I think WP is a great place to start but should be handled with care due to the massive holes which are fixed regularly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Andrew D. Todd, May 3rd, 2013 @ 5:17pm

    Something Similar.

    I remembered this from many years ago, and Googled for it. I didn't find it on Google, but I did find it on Bing (give credit where credit is due).While it was published in Harpers, it is of course a public record of the Australian courts, and I am therefore within my rights in reproducing it. One might add that one admired the quality of a jurist who can avoid losing his temper under those circumstances.

    =============================================================
    [court transcript]
    contempt
    of court

    From the transcript of a pretrial hearing that took
    place on May 5,in a criminal court in Adelaide,
    Australia,before judge Roy Grubb.In the transcript
    below,the prisoner is Yusuf Biyikli,a Turkish immi-
    grant charged with "assault occasioning actual bodi-
    ly harm";Mr. Smart is the attorney for the crown.

    [The charge is read]
    PRISONER:Shut up,fucking poofter.You poofter,
    thank you.
    HIS HONOR:You just keep quiet,we will have
    a word with you in a moment.
    PRISONER:Fuck to you.All right,you poofter.
    All right,I fuck you.That is answer.
    HIS HONOR:It is said that you assaulted-
    PRISONER:Fuck the English,fuck the colony,
    all right.
    HIS HONOR:If you don't shut up-
    PRISONER:Fuck the judge too.That is not true.
    HIS HONOR:Do we assume this is a plea of not
    guilty?
    MR.SMART:Yes,I think wa can assume that.
    PRISONER:I fuck you,answer you,stuff you,
    poofter.Is that enough for you answer?
    HIS HONOR:That is no answer,but I take it as
    a plea of not guilty.Inview of the out-
    rageous outburst from the accused,I assume that
    the torrent of language from him is a plea of not
    guilty to each count.Remand for trial.Has some-
    one been imprudent enough to grant a bail
    agreement?
    MR. SMART:I hesitate to ask him
    PRISONER:Fuck you.
    HIS HONOR:Do you wish to ask for bail?
    PRISONER:You ask yourself bail,poofter.
    Now ask me.
    HIS HONOR:I don't have to ask.
    PRISONER:Fuck the bail,fuck Australia.
    HIS HONOR:I take it ,then, you don't wish
    to seek bail.
    PRISONER:Stuff that.
    HIS HONOR:No application for bail,the ac-
    cused is remanded for trial in custody.
    PRISONER:Fucking bastard,poofter,melon-arse.

    from Harper's Magazine,December 1993.
    #

    http://roma.theoffside.com/team-news/roma-cagliari-postponed-due-to-death-of-lazio-fan.h tml
    ==============================================================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Tom, May 3rd, 2013 @ 6:00pm

    Re: Flabbergasted

    You have just highlighted Schroeder's dilemma which was why was his patent application viewable before "less than 18 months old".

    Oh, I know, it's because the patent office was tickled and released it early. NICE!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 6:11pm

    [quote]When I reveal to them that it was me, they usually respond with something like, "No, really, who actually built your website?"[/quote]
    Obviously the patent office dropped the ball on the new HTML 6 standard he invented.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    John William Nelson, May 3rd, 2013 @ 7:20pm

    Attorney's website; this is hilarious

    Oh wow. A 2004 grad it seems from McGeorge. His firm's website is here: http://www.socalpatent.com/

    The best part is trying to figure out why one Trademark fee is $450 and one is $500. However, he IS a Hollywood lawyer, as he points out on his website.

    Looks like his "website" company is here: http://angelsharkwebsites.com/

    Wow. Just. Wow.

    As we say in the South, bless his heart.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    CJ, May 3rd, 2013 @ 7:36pm

    Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    His application was filed 5/12/11 and published 11/15/12. That's 18 months right there. The real issue is that he accuses the examiner of being retarded when he can't even do a simple addition.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 7:42pm

    Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    15 - 12 = 3 months, plus 12 months for one year, gives 15 months only.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2013 @ 7:43pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    The comment system ate my pseudo-html tag, trying again:

    15 - 12 = 3 months, plus 12 months for one year, gives 15 months only.

    </confused_by_the_date_format>

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    icon
    Rikuo (profile), May 3rd, 2013 @ 10:33pm

    "You see, for the past several years I have taught myself how to build my own websites, everything…from A-Z. I can do HTML, the Videos, the graphics, the images, CSS, and even the SEO. And I think that I can build one hell of a website. For the past several years, I have had countless people call me out of the blue and ask me who built my website. When I reveal to them that it was me, they usually respond with something like, “No, really, who actually built your website?” "

    No, when people are asking who really built it, they're giving you an opportunity to dodge the bullet and say it was retarded chimp who only just discovered HTML. They're being polite and giving you the chance to save face.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    icon
    McCrea (profile), May 4th, 2013 @ 1:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I hate numbers

    Dude, there is no month #15. 15 would be the day field.

    11 - 5 = 6 months. 6 + 12 = 18. Ta da.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 4th, 2013 @ 1:38am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    Right. The US uses Month/Day/Year instead of the more logical Day/Month/Year.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), May 4th, 2013 @ 4:17am

    Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    "It has always been my understanding"

    Given his "understanding" of website design, I think we might have found the problem.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    icon
    Christopher Weigel (profile), May 4th, 2013 @ 6:55am

    This guy just keeps vomiting out more, too...
    Here he seems to be claiming that the law school Crouch works at is a scam? Not really sure, he just vomited numbers all over a page and called it a day.

    and here he has a badly-spelled attempt at the "Glenn Beck" style of ad hominem.

    Looks like there's still more amusement yet to come, if you're willing to brave his remarkably shitty website to find it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    ldne, May 5th, 2013 @ 10:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    May 12th 2011 to November 15th 2012 is 18 months. 12-5=7 months to the end of 2011 and then 11 months into 2012 for the month of November.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    identicon
    ldne, May 5th, 2013 @ 10:54am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    There is a 12th in every month, but only one 12th month of the year. When looking through filing cabinets you go to the year for the drawer, then look by month and then day. That's where the format came from, stamping first the month, then day, then year in order of most useful. Year is last because you don't need it unless something is misfiled or out of the cabinet.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 5th, 2013 @ 11:45am

    Didn't you mean

    "But that's apparently not how Andrew Schroeder rolls."

    But that's apparently not how Andrew Schroeder trolls.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 5th, 2013 @ 12:20pm

    Re: Re:

    Really AJ, your butt hurt is showing. Please do pull up your pants and waddle along.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 5th, 2013 @ 12:40pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    You're arguing Schroeder's cat type stuff here. I the month count dead or alive. Observation collapses the field and the yield is 18 months no matter the order of the imaginary time designations.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 5th, 2013 @ 12:45pm

    Re:

    Schroeder's cat

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 5th, 2013 @ 3:10pm

    Re: Attorney's website; this is hilarious

    Woah, I have seldom seen such a slow ass website. I have some slow internet anyway but this site is ridiculous. I gave up on it fully loading. Shame too because there looked to be a plethora of lulz to be had.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 6th, 2013 @ 6:06am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Flabbergasted

    Nah, Year-Month-Day is where the logic is really at!

    - Seriously though. What is more "logical" depends on what the end goal is. See Idne's post above for what makes month/day/year logical.

    Me? I tend to work with computer systems where year-month-day makes the automated sorting easier. Therefore, that format is more logical for that use.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    icon
    5up Mushroom (profile), May 6th, 2013 @ 8:01am

    A computer security researcher...
    However, from my own research I have found no evidence whatsoever that it is possible.

    An SEO expert..
    I can do HTML, the Videos, the graphics, the images, CSS, and even the SEO.

    A Misogynist...
    Some guys have video games, girls have shoe hunting expeditions, I have the website munchies.

    Who doesn't give a fuck.
    I don’t give a fuck what they tell you.


    What an amazing man!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), May 6th, 2013 @ 2:28pm

    Re:

    What an amazing man!


    I don't always web design, but when I do, I prefer it to be sucky.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 6th, 2013 @ 5:35pm

    Re:

    Yeah, I accessed the file wrapper right away to try and check out the ridiculous filing, but it was removed by the USPTO. No trouble getting into the file wrapper, though.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    identicon
    Egregrious Villain, May 7th, 2013 @ 4:53am

    A few notes from Title 37 - Code of Federal Regulations: Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights.

    §1.3 Business to be conducted with decorum and courtesy.

    Applicants and their attorneys or agents are required to conduct their business with the United States Patent and Trademark Office with decorum and courtesy.

    §10.23 Misconduct
    (a) A practitioner shall not engage in disreputable or gross misconduct.
    (b) A practitioner shall not:
    (4) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
    (6) Engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on the practitioner’s fitness to practice before the Office.

    §10.77 Failing to act competently.
    A practitioner shall not:
    (a) Handle a legal matter which the practitioner knows or should know that the practitioner is not competent to handle, without associating with the practitioner another practitioner who is competent to handle it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    identicon
    J.Demers, Jun 15th, 2013 @ 3:34am

    Re: Just a thought...

    "imagine the delicious irony if Crouch sued Schroeder for defamation and won."

    You might nail Schroeder for "attempted" defamation, but Crouch's readers are unanimous in laughing at Schroeder's incompetence. Fortunately for him, Dennis is smart enough to recognize a lunatic, and classy enough to ignore him.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This