One weird legal trick that makes patent trolls cry


Can we not? I reflexively recoil from “one weird trick” headlines, ironic or no.


The Judicial Conference of the US has approved the elimination of Rule 84

Rule 34 is still safe though, right?


three dozen forms …established in 1938 to indicate… simplicity

I love lawyers.


Cory, almost everything about this post is inaccurate and should be retracted. Most importantly, the change to the Federal Rules deleting Form 18 will not affect patent litigation. Nor is it even remotely a “weird trick.”
Pleading standards for patent cases are set, first, by caselaw setting out the minimum pleading requirements, and second, by local rules set by each court. The existence of Form 18 makes no practical difference one way or the other. As the quote from the conference says, these forms are obsolete and almost never used.
Additionally, with respect to patent trolls specifically: the most popular jurisdiction for trolls is E.D. Tex., where there are detailed rules (modeled on rules first established in N.D. Cal.) which require patent plaintiffs to serve detailed disclosures setting out the basis of their claims soon after they file suit. So while plaintiffs do regularly file bare-bones initial pleadings (as allowed by caselaw, regardless of Form 18), they soon thereafter must provide extensive charts detailing how the accused device allegedly infringes each of the limitations of the patent claims. Many other popular jurisdictions have similar rules.

I’m in favor of ditching Form 18 but it’s not going to have an effect on trolls.


Trolls will for sure find some other way to exploit the system or may be fine/make some other loophole . Its their bread and butter after all…




This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.