We’ve just been scammed with details of Patent 2009, a new service offering patent pending status + search for 2009 NIS + fees. Someone wise once told me that when something sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
Apparently the firm, operated by a Ms. Jessica Cohen (presumably the attractive woman in the white bathrobe that appears in their spam mail shot) uses technical experts to draft and file provisional patents without claims in the US.
Ms. Cohen does not appear to be a registered Israel Patent Attorney or an Attorney-at-law. I checked both registries, but clearly there a lot of Cohens and she may be licensed under another name. From her website she certainly appears not to be licensed. This does not stop her providing testimonials from satisfied clients for both patent and trademark services.
Alongside the woman in the bathrobe is a picture of an issued US patent resplendent with seal and ribbon. Since provisional patent applications do not become examined and cannot issue into allowed patents, this is a little misleading.
Ms Cohen claims that Patent2009 is her registered trademark and uses the circle R mark. She has indeed filed a trademark application in Israel for the stylized logo, but the mark has not yet issued. Since words like Patent cannot be protected by trademarks and 2009 is inherently non-distinctive, we wait to see how examination of the trademark proceeds. We are pleased to note that she has the courage of her convictions and does not use professional counsel for her trademark services. We also assume from her choosing such a poor choice of mark, that she believes in filing to obtain pending status rather than to filing applications that may be allowed.
When drafting provisional applications, like real utility applications that are examined, every word is a two-edged sword. Statements can be used against you. There is a reason why qualified practitioners are expensive. If the provisional does not include a proper description of the inventive feature that later on, on examination, proves to have novelty and inventive step, it is valueless. If after filing the provisional, an inventor describes something or publishes it in a publicity brochure or the like, but the provisional is insufficient, then claiming priority rights from it is meaningless.
Anyone can file a trademark application for themselves. Only licensed patent attorneys or attorneys-at-law can do so on behalf of clients. Helping filling in forms is legal advice. It is illegal to do this if not licensed to do so. see Section 19 and 20 of the Israel Bar Law.
Ms Cohen apparently files provisional application without claims. It is not clear that such an application can serve as a priority document for a regular application.
She can’t have professional liability insurance as she is not a professional and we assume in three months time she’ll be trading as Patent2010, putting her fees up by a Shequel and the Limited liability company which presumably has few assets will no longer exist.
We call upon the AIPA and the Israel Law Society to protect the interest of the public and the profession and to close her down.
Another non-licensed practitioner that came my way recently actually calls himself a licensed patent agent in his sales literature, despite not being licensed in Israel, the US or anywhere else. This is not only illegal under the Israel Bar Law, but is also passing off and unjust enrichment.
Dear Atty. Factor,
Our site states that we do not provide legal advice. Our staff is composed of engineers, not lawyers. We provide technical and design services, as described by our trademark classification, 42, “Scientific and technological services and research and design relating thereto; .. . ” Our rates are calculated accordingly for engineering services, which are usually lower than those for legal services.
We believe in democratization of innovation, particularly to promote local economic growth. According to the USPTO code 37 CFR 1.31, “An applicant for patent may file and prosecute his or her own case.” http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/04.txt. Provisional patents were instituted by the USPTO, specifically so that laymen could protect and market their ideas, quickly and inexpensively. Similarly, we do not believe that entrepreneurs should have to pay the average legal services fee of $1000 to file an Israeli trademark. We have routinely directed our clients to the following online trademark application form, published by the Ministry of Justice, and to the following list, to determine their product or service’s classification. The Ministry of Justice also answers inventor’s questions by phone or email, without billing hours.
If you remain unconvinced of the quality of our work, we invite you to review our first US Patent, #7445285, granted Nov. 4, 2008. We would be interested in hearing your comments.
We also believe that it is important to research facts before publishing them as conjecture, both in drafting provisional applications and in writing blogs. We request that you apologize for and remove your remarks regarding “bathrobe”, as these suggest that we offer services other than those described by our website; and “[you]’ve been scammed”, as we have had no prior engagement with your firm. However, since our office is expanding, we are currently hiring; so if you or any of your colleagues are interested in working for us, please contact us.
Regards,
Jessica Cohen
Jessica,
Despite having a law degree I am not an attorney-at-law. I therefore do not provide legal advice beyond my legal competence. I do provide legal advice relating to trademarks, designs and patents. I am licensed to do so. You are not. I do not know what other services you provide. If they are legal, then you may continue to do so.
I have no problem with people applying for trademarks and patents on their own. I do, however, have a problem with quasilegal advice and do not think that stating that you are lawyers is sufficient to overcome the requirements of the law, which are there to protect the public.
You may want to democracize the providing of professional services, and allow anyone to provide medical operations and abortions, to conduct weddings and funerals, to help third parties fill out tax returns, to teach people to fly or to drive. But, even if you do not claim to be a doctor, a chevra kadisha, accountant or tax consultant a licensed flying or driving instructor, that does not mean that it is legal to provide such services.
If you are unhappy with the law, go ahead and lobby the Knesset to change it. In a democracy, one has to abide by the laws legislated by the parliament or you are guilty of a Criminal act. What you are describing is anarchy not democracy.
There are IP laws that may need reforming. I have a oft-spot for the various Pirate parties around the world that are trying to abolish copyright. That does not mean that in the interim certain acts like copying and distributing films and music are not criminal.
One can file a telephone directory as a provisional application and claim patent pending status. The problem is if and when clients subsequently find themselves with a legal headache that is impossible to solve. Your provisional may not provide a valid priority date, and that is a problem. I could critique the US patent you’ve mentioned, but it is irrelevant to do so, as my issue is one of legal principle. You may conceivably be totally technically competent, but you are not legally competent. The scam you run is equivalent to that of firms employing lawyers and doctors and helping obtain national insurance or health insurance claims. It is illegal, therefore malpractice insurance cannot be obtained.
If you have obtained a US patent without professional counsel, does that mean that the scope of protection is appropriate to the scope of the invention? Will it be enforceable by the courts? Some licensed practioners are better than others, but licensing does at least provide and guarantee a minimum standard.
There are jurisidictions where anyone can practice before the Patent bar. This is the situation in the UK. In Israel and the US this is not the case. I have nothing against DIY-ers,. You filing your own trademark application is OK. Providing IP services to third parties, is, however, illegal.
If you want to offer IP services, get trained, examined and licensed. Otherwise you are simply a public menace.
“If you remain unconvinced of the quality of our work, we invite you to review our first US Patent, #7445285, granted Nov. 4, 2008. We would be interested in hearing your comments.”
I am apparently more curious than Michael … or perhaps I have more time on my hands. In either case, I took a couple of minutes to look up the patent in question.
I wasn’t planning on critiquing the writing of prosecution, but in any case, as pertains to the subject of discussion here, the patent in question is irrelevant because Ms. Cohen is the listed inventor and assignee. So she had every right to prosecute on her own behalf. Which proves … nothing. But if I was trying to demonstrate how well I could translate someone else’s specs into “patentese” I might have chosen a different example.
I would be curious to know though, who the staff “engineers” are at Patent2009. According to Ms. Cohen’s website, she studied design and architecture. And the Team Profile page at Patent2009 is “coming soon”.
Michael,
It is not so simple for Ms. Cohen to obtain a license in the US or in Israel – it appears that she is NOT EVEN ELIGIBLE TO TAKE THE EXAMINATION. Apparently, the “technically competent” Ms. Cohen holds degrees in design and architecture only (actually from top universities) but does not even hold a degree in science or engineering.
Furthermore, in the event that Ms. Cohen were to return to school and to complete a degree in science or engineering, it is not so clear that the USPTO or the IPO would grant her a license, even if she were to pass the Examination. (Please note that both in the US and in Israel a majority of test-takers fail the patent attorney/agents’ examination). In particular, I think both the USPTO and the IPO would be quite interested her unlicensed patent practice, and would be quite reluctant to grant her a license under the circumstances. Law breakers do not deserve licenses.
Since I know that Ms. Cohen is reading this, I want to submit one final comment. On her web site, she lists the titles of provisional applications from various clients. I sincerely hope that she received written permission to do this. Please note that provisional applications are only made available to the public 18 months after filing (in the event that no non-publication request is submitted), and thus disclosing even the titles of these applications would be a serious breach of confidentiality. Licensed attorneys and agents are well aware of these issues.
Moshe
I just came across your amusing blog entry about “Patent2009.” I agree with you that it appears to be a scam, and that if she hasn’t crossed the line of legality by offering professional services without actually having a license to provide them, she’s pretty darn close to it. If you read the web site very carefully, she does not actually appear to be promising to deliver a specification including anything other than a written description of the drawings that she drafts.
While the “sample document” looks like a real patent application, it cannot be enlarged to the point where you can read it. It appears that the so-called “detailed description” is actually just an expansion of the “brief description of the drawings.” Since she drafts the drawings herself, and the inventor files the application himself, I suppose that she would argue that all she is doing is acting as a draftsperson, and if the inventor chooses to use for the “detailed description of the invention” the descriptions of the drawings that she provides to him as a personal favor, well, that’s not her problem.
Her website reminds me of a short story by Graham Greene called “When Greek Meets Greek,” in which two rather hapless con men set up a diploma mill and write a highly misleading advertisement that makes it sound like their diploma mill is affiliated with Oxford, making sure at every stage to check “Every Man His Own Lawyer.” As I said, I got the impression that she is trying her best to stay just this side of the line between legal and illegal. But I honestly don’t know whether doing a patent search and reporting the results thereof counts as legal advice. It’s not as if she does much of a patent search — just the USPTO (Google is actually easier to use) and Israel databases. Since you can’t search the texts using the Israel patent office database, I’m not sure what exactly she thinks that she’s selling her clients.
I think that while her site is misleading in the extreme, as you pointed out in your blog, if you read the fine print, she’s not actually giving anyone any advice. She’s basically filling out a form that you can download from the USPTO and charging you 2009 shekels for the privilege. (Check out https://patentmatch.net/, which will do it for even less money.)
I think that the fraud is a more subtle one — she isn’t *exactly* claiming to be a patent attorney, but she is certainly *implying* it.
Just what I was waiting for! I was researching articles for our site when I came across your post (on Patent 2009 and Other non-Licensed Practitioners The IP Factor) which I noticed on Google. We would love you to write for us, if interested. I’ve bookmarked this post for future reference. Nice comments here as well – Cheers from Marketing Guidebook