Somewhat confusing bit brought up by this blog post: it claims the previous similar case (grad student Matt Charest suing for royalties on a patent he worked ex

Somewhat confusing bit brought up by this blog post: it claims the previous similar case (grad student Matt Charest suing for royalties on a patent he worked extensively on but was cut out of) brought by this lawyer was a failure, while the source article mentions Harvard settled that case out of court on "mutually beneficial terms". I guess the blog post may be referring to more specific claims in that case that the PhD advisor had a role to look out for the student's best interest, and by cutting the student out of the patent, the advisor was going against that (the court said the advisor had no obligation to look out for the student's financial interest). The student still got paid, although the amount is secret.