The Third Circuit court upheld a sanction against a senior Cooley LLP attorney, who was charged for the late submission of evidence in a patent dispute. Although described as ‘rather harsh’, it was recognized that the district judge had the discretion to impose the penalty.[1]
The proceedings were set in motion when a Pennsylvania federal judge issued an order based on the attorney’s failure to meet the discovery deadline in a high stakes patent dispute. Subsequently, the Third Circuit court affirmed this order.
While the Third Circuit court acknowledged the severity of the sanctions, they ultimately respected the district judge’s prerogative in the administration of such censures. Notably, this case takes place amidst a wider discussion on the ethical and professional obligations of attorneys in the field of patent law.