 |
 |
 |
 |  |
|
|
Why You Need A Court-Appointed Neutral When We Pay Judges to Resolve DisputesI’m going assume that if you’ve navigated your way here you’ve either got a civil case that needs a Court-Appointed Neutral for pre-trial and discovery or you have a patent case that needs a Court-Appointed Neutral’s help with claims construction. I have 30 years experience lawyering on both sides of the docket before many different judges as well as a technical background in electrical engineering and computer science. As it turns out, these resources make me quite useful to judges and lawyers who need to clarify and decide issues of pre-trial procedure and discovery in civil cases and claims construction in patent cases. From where I sit these days, trial lawyering just ain’t what it used to be. From barristers standing in front of juries, we’ve turned into “litigators,” with all the frustration that transformation entails. We’re all dealing with the brave new world of discovering electronically stored information, especially judges who lack the time, desire or capacity to understand the technical aspects. No matter how important the issues are to your client, busy trial judges just don’t like spending their time on discovery and pre-trial disputes. In this challenging scenario, it’s getting nigh on to impossible to get enough time from the judge on a pre-trial or a discovery matter so you’re sure your client has gotten a full and fair hearing. And then there are the patent cases! We’re no longer talking to juries about what patent claims mean. The US Supreme Court has told us that judges, not juries, have to somehow - through some procedure - instruct juries about how to construe patent claims. Most lawyers have serious concerns that a judge’s lack of time and interest, or inability to understand complex technical issues, will prevent them from getting their clients’ interpretation of patent claims fairly construed. Some Courts have magistrates with specialized technical expertise who can assist with patent claims construction. Some Courts choose to appoint Court-Appointed Neutrals to make recommendations about claims construction. Clients are understandably anxious when they look at this system from the outside. And, honestly, none of us should blame them. Lawyers need to be able to recommend a Court-Appointed Neutral to their clients who they’re confident
SO, HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU WANT TO WORK WITH ME? The bottom line for you and your clients is a wise and efficient resolution of your dispute from someone who’s independent, fair, hardworking, smart, experienced, right? During the last decade I have helped lawyers and clients survey the boundaries around their intellectual properties so that trial judges, juries, and appellate Courts can determine whether patents are valid or infringements have occurred and disputes can be resolved. While I have become knowledgeable about the principles of claims construction, I remain aware - always - that claims may ultimately be considered by a jury, and I continue to believe that if we all do our jobs, juries can in fact understand and decide even patent cases correctly. I have represented clients who have won and lost before every kind of decision-maker in the US legal system including:
I’ve been involved in every type of dispute known to the civil justice system, either as an advocate or as a neutral. Most often, clients come to me with needs related to mediation, litigation and/or arbitration around
And there have been dozens of other types of cases. Here’s a complete list of my case experience. I have represented
as both plaintiffs and defendants. I have already served as a Court-Appointed Neutral in over 30 cases in Texas Federal and State District Courts. So I’ve got a track record. A representative list is in my CV. If you check with other lawyers and judges, I hope you’ll hear that I know how to make thoughtful decisions quickly and inexpensively. MY BELIEFS ABOUT THIS WORK I look at Court-Appointed Neutral work as an opportunity to help judges and attorneys fairly and efficiently prepare a case for a jury trial. I actually believe the words chiseled above the entrance to the University of Texas Law School that promise people access to legal processes that “truly and impartially administer justice.” I don’t believe that cases should be dismissed because the discovery issues are “just too hard to deal with.” I do believe that if the judges and lawyers do their jobs, juries can understand and reach wise decisions, even in the most complex cases. I’m not afraid to call balls and strikes, knowing that, despite hard work and a fundamental sense of fairness, I still might miss a few. In other words, I’m humbled by the power that accompanies the authority of a Court-Appointed Neutral. I assume that lawyers have tried hard to work out their disputes before they bring them to me and that they’re looking for a decision, not a scolding. I understand that lawyers represent people and will have to deliver them the results of my decisions - win, lose or draw. I’m not interested in embarrassing lawyers or in trying to demonstrate who’s the smartest lawyer in the courtroom. I like good lawyering. I like well-reasoned, well-supported argument. When you work hard to prepare the issues, I want you to know that I will read the briefs and the cases, listen to the argument and witnesses, and try to follow the law. If you’ve got a creative suggestion to help the legal system work better for the clients and the public, I’m all ears. When we get to the end, we will have created legal precedent in our work together. I want us all to look back on it and be proud of it. |