Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly quotes Heather Repicky in coverage of SJC decisionPrint PDF
Heather B. Repicky, a partner the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation group, was quoted by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly in “Ruling has patent bar exhaling sigh of relief” on December 30. The article discusses the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision in Maling v. Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, et al, which ruled that working on behalf of clients competing for similar patents is not a per se conflict of interest.
Heather, who authored an amicus brief in the case on behalf of the Boston Patent Law Association, noted that the phrase “similar invention” got the patent bar’s attention, raising fears that the court might have designs on subjecting attorneys to a conflict-of-interest duty above and beyond the one embodied in Rule 1.7. She points out that adopting such a position would have posed more questions than answers. “’Similar’ is not a word we in the patent bar use; it’s not a term of art,” she said. Heather noted that despite the good news for the patent bar, the court went out of its way to note that the patent field is a tricky area.