23 Posts

Yeah, bar events are fun, but when you have to put up 23 posts in one day to catch up … not so much.

In the past few weeks I’ve been fortunate to participate in:

  • the EDTX bench/bar planning conference,
  • the State Bar annual meeting, including board of directors meetings and other events for the board, the Litigation Section Council, and the IP Law Section Council
  • Berkeley Center for Law & Technology Patent Case Management Year in Review seminar (panelist)
  • Baylor’s LL.M. Litigation Management program judges panel and other events in Waco
  • Tex-ABOTA meeting & CLE in Santa Fe
  • Judicial retirement party for Judge Caroline Craven in Texarkana
  • Judicial investiture for Judge Derek Gilliland in Waco

And that’s not counting a visit or two to Austin to see the (no longer Future) Engineer.

But after we record the next edition of the BCLT podcast tomorrow (which we are now filming with the intention of making the video version available for CLE) I “should” be caught up. Not literally, but I’m making my deadlines!

Hope you enjoy today’s posts. As always, if you have any questions or comments, drop me a line at michael.smith@solidcounsel.com


Patent Litigation Management: Judge Derek Gilliland Provides Perspective

U.S. Magistrate Judge Derek Gilliland, former patent trial attorney and the newest judge in the Waco Division of the WDTX, will be discussing some hot topics in the patent litigation world tomorrow at noon. Sign up to watch here.

Judge Gilliland will be teaching the new Patent Litigation Management course in Baylor’s LL.M. Litigation Management program starting in Fall 2022. Tomorrow he will be speaking on topics including pre-suit patent investigation, consideration of potential venue issues, claim construction disputes, fact and expert discovery concerns, and preparation for jury selection and trial.

Audrey Kariel 90th Birthday

We celebrated the Hub matriarch’s 90th birthday at the “store” Saturday with a proclamation from her successor as Marshall mayor. The walls may carry books, not shoe boxes, these days, but we remember our heritage.

Long before the Kariels sold me the building, Audrey and I served on the Marshall city council (then called the city “commission”) from 1996-2001.

My association with her family (and the Hub, which now serves as my offices after 112 years and three generations in her family as a shoe store) goes back to 1981, when her late husband Louis had me come by the store to get my bus ticket and spending money from the American Legion for my attendance at Boys’ State in Austin during high school.

Texas’ Boys State was actually the subject of the Emmy award-winning documentary Boys State in 2020 – you might want to check it out. This “raucous journey into the heart of democracy” as Apple TV put it, captures 1,100 teenage boys from across Texas coming together to build a representative government from the ground up. It was an interesting week, as I recall.

For most of the previous half-century our families had been neighbors on the 100 block of East Austin, with my grandfather having a greeting card store two doors down from the Kariels at the Hub, and we enjoyed continuing the association through the city commission and various historical groups over the years.

We have hosted the Kariel family at the Hub numerous times in the past 12 years, including for the dedication of the building’s Texas historical marker recognizing not just the building but the contributions of the Kariel family to the history of Marshall, a Shabbat service before a patent trial (the family used to conduct services in the store after the Marshall synagogue closed, so it wasn’t the first) and even a mezuzeh dedication out front (for a former altar boy, my Hebrew’s not bad as you’d expect).

So it was a pleasure and a privilege to host the Kariel family in our offices again. And to paraphrase Yoda, “when 90 years old you are, look this good you will not.”

Baylor LL.M Litigation Management Roundtable – Discoverability of Litigation Funding

I’m enjoying an online roundtable discussion today on the discoverability of litigation funding.

The panel consists of a professor who’s written on the subject, a litigation funder, and a lawyer in a prominent defense firm who works with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in DC advocating public policy initiatives requiring disclosure of litigation funding agreements because his clients claim they adversely affect litigation and need regulating. (For some reason his firm wasn’t identified, only the section within the firm, so this came out in the discussion).

Very good discussion of the different viewpoints. No direct representation by lawyers or clients who receive litigation funding opposing disclosure – or lawyers that argue for disclosure – but to be fair the discussion makes clear, by affirmative statements or job titles, none of the panelists represent plaintiffs or defendants in trial court proceedings, so you didn’t get the state of the art trial court argument on the discoverability issue. You did get a very good analysis of the issues this raises at the macro level – the arguments that I recognize that you raise to policymakers in the halls of Congress and state legislatures trying to enact legislation regulating the practice of litigation funding.

BCLT IP + Tech Month – “Patent Case Management” panel

I am working with Peter Menell, Allison Schmitt and Roman Swoopes on a panel presentation as part of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology’s new “IP+Tech month” program – a year in review program with panels presenting on over 30 IP & tech topics during May.

BCLT reports that “[t]hese are not your typical CLE courses. They are highly-focused sessions that are curated through Berkeley Law.  Our instructors and faculty are the cornerstone of this program and, with over 60 tech and IP-focused instructors, that’s a lot of expertise.”

On Monday we’ll be presenting on the subject of Patent Case Management, with yours truly herding the Texas-specific developments while Allison and Roman cover Delaware and California, respectively. After that Professor Menell will join us for a moderated roundtable on the topic.

So we have something other than a folder of cases for attendees, I took the Texas-specific developments and put them into a separate document with the relevant narrative enhanced with photos and watercolors of Texas courthouses so it looks nice. It’s attached below. Readers will recognize it as a subset of some of the more important cases and developments in Texas’ patent courts over the past year. I had initially intended it to be more comprehensive, but in the end decided to just mirror what I plan on talking about as part of the panel.