4 ms·

I’ma patent attorney. I’ve never heard that he’s biased, only that he’s competent.

• staticman2 6y ago
  Plaintiff attorneys don't want a competent judge, they simply want to win. An incompetent judge is fine if the incompetence is to their benefit. What I wrote earlier, that plaintiffs choose which district to sue under, so they pick the district that they feel will have the strongest likelihood of ruling in their favor-- should not be controversial. This is Law school 101 type stuff. I believe you when you say you are a patent attorney, but I also fear you are posting misinformation here. I believe a competent law professor would talk about "plaintiff friendly" courts and what you've posted here, about "respected" judges, suggests you are an untrustworthy poster.
  • beervirus 6y ago
    It’s funny that you call it law school 101 stuff, because your analysis (and tone) is indeed about what I’d expect from a 1L. Judge Albright’s record does not show him to be patent-troll-friendly, or even patentee-friendly. It shows him to be smart, knowledgeable, and principled. His is exactly the kind of court a plaintiff or a defendant should be happy to be in. Efficiency in disposing of cases cuts both ways, you know.
• staticman2 6y ago
  Your job as an attorney is to serve your client, not the truth. A law school professor would seem to have no such incentive to deceive people- so I would not trust a word you've written here over the linked paper by the law professors.
  • beervirus 6y ago
    Yes, the person who actually has expertise in the field must be lying because you don't like what he's saying. That's a great perspective. Anyway my clients aren't patent trolls. My clients tend to be the kinds of companies that get sued by trolls.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]