5 ms·

> The gist behind this case is that the Judge's son owns patent law firm in East Texas where they often represent both sides. Isn't this a blatant conflict of

> The gist behind this case is that the Judge's son owns patent law firm in East Texas where they often represent both sides. Isn't this a blatant conflict of interest? If this isn't grounds for disbarment, what is?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
mfoy_ 10y ago
Maybe the firm doesn't represent both sides simultaneously. Maybe they usually represent the patent troll, but if someone needs a patent troll defense lawyer they'll do that too. Basically, as long as patent litigation is in town, business is good.
- mikeash 10y ago
  That helps, but the judge working cases his son's law firm also works is pretty bad too.
  - mfoy_ 10y ago
    Oh absolutely. The judge is entertaining all those patent cases simply because it's good for his son's law practice. Unacceptable.
    - blueblob 10y ago
      IANAL but according to Wikipedia, being related to the judge is grounds for the judge to recuse him/herself from a case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification#Applicable_to_most_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification#Appl...
  - zuminator 10y ago
    To be clear, Meyer does not allege anything of that sort in the clip. He says, "Bo Davis is a lawyer in the Eastern District of Texas that represents patent trolls and their victims. Bo Davis is Judge Leonard Davis's son working a law practice in the very same district in which his father is a judge. So, if Judge Leonard Davis can encourage more patent trolls to bring more lawsuits into the Eastern District of Texas, his son is one of the people that's gonna rack up the billable hours." So there's no allegation that Judge Davis (now retired) actually presided over any of his son's cases, merely that his son stood to benefit from the overall patent-troll friendly climate of the Eastern District court. Not really a clear-cut recusal situation. If anything, the fact that his son's firm represents trolls and victims alike meant there was less reason for a specific bias on behalf of the judge.
    - hospes 10y ago
      >>Not really a clear-cut recusal situation. One of those 3 letter federal agencies, that government spends $billions on, needs to look at this "not really clear cut situation".
      - mobilefriendly 10y ago
        This corruption is a government feature, not a bug. Washington needs trial lawyer money and has had trouble figuring out how to fleece Silicon Valley directly, so trial lawyer patent abuse is a win-win for Congress and the Obama Administration. Remember-- the entire basis of this nonsense is the patent office issuing vague patents, everything is running exactly to plan.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Good points, thanks for clearing that up. The bit about "specific bias" is interesting. I wouldn't assume that the judge is biased for or against patent trolls, but his position gives him reason to be biased for patent trolling, which isn't quite the same. It would be to the advantage of his son to make a big deal out of cases which don't deserve it. Accepting cases about ridiculous patents would do that, as would encouraging trials for patent cases which are obviously legitimate. Whether that's happening or not I have no idea, but he clearly has an incentive to keep things stirred up in this area.
- davemel37 10y ago
  Just to add to this. I am sure the legal community in East Texas is close knit. There may never be blatant impropriety, but no one wants to be on the wrong side of a judge in town. (i.e the Judges Son tries a case with a different Judge in town, but that Judge is buddies with the other Judges.)

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

mfoy_ 10y ago

Maybe the firm doesn't represent both sides simultaneously. Maybe they usually represent the patent troll, but if someone needs a patent troll defense lawyer they'll do that too. Basically, as long as patent litigation is in town, business is good.

mikeash 10y ago
That helps, but the judge working cases his son's law firm also works is pretty bad too.
- mfoy_ 10y ago
  Oh absolutely. The judge is entertaining all those patent cases simply because it's good for his son's law practice. Unacceptable.
  - blueblob 10y ago
    IANAL but according to Wikipedia, being related to the judge is grounds for the judge to recuse him/herself from a case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification#Applicable_to_most_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification#Appl...
- zuminator 10y ago
  To be clear, Meyer does not allege anything of that sort in the clip. He says, "Bo Davis is a lawyer in the Eastern District of Texas that represents patent trolls and their victims. Bo Davis is Judge Leonard Davis's son working a law practice in the very same district in which his father is a judge. So, if Judge Leonard Davis can encourage more patent trolls to bring more lawsuits into the Eastern District of Texas, his son is one of the people that's gonna rack up the billable hours." So there's no allegation that Judge Davis (now retired) actually presided over any of his son's cases, merely that his son stood to benefit from the overall patent-troll friendly climate of the Eastern District court. Not really a clear-cut recusal situation. If anything, the fact that his son's firm represents trolls and victims alike meant there was less reason for a specific bias on behalf of the judge.
  - hospes 10y ago
    >>Not really a clear-cut recusal situation. One of those 3 letter federal agencies, that government spends $billions on, needs to look at this "not really clear cut situation".
    - mobilefriendly 10y ago
      This corruption is a government feature, not a bug. Washington needs trial lawyer money and has had trouble figuring out how to fleece Silicon Valley directly, so trial lawyer patent abuse is a win-win for Congress and the Obama Administration. Remember-- the entire basis of this nonsense is the patent office issuing vague patents, everything is running exactly to plan.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Good points, thanks for clearing that up. The bit about "specific bias" is interesting. I wouldn't assume that the judge is biased for or against patent trolls, but his position gives him reason to be biased for patent trolling, which isn't quite the same. It would be to the advantage of his son to make a big deal out of cases which don't deserve it. Accepting cases about ridiculous patents would do that, as would encouraging trials for patent cases which are obviously legitimate. Whether that's happening or not I have no idea, but he clearly has an incentive to keep things stirred up in this area.
davemel37 10y ago
Just to add to this. I am sure the legal community in East Texas is close knit. There may never be blatant impropriety, but no one wants to be on the wrong side of a judge in town. (i.e the Judges Son tries a case with a different Judge in town, but that Judge is buddies with the other Judges.)