Lost (without) the Translation

In Wintek Corporation v. TPK Touch Solutions, Inc., IPR2013-00567, Paper  40, IPR2013-00568, Paper 41 (August 28, 2014), when petitioner arrived at the deposition of patent owner’s expert, it was surprised to find that the witness, who provided an English declaration, needed a translator.  The patent owner thoughtfully provided one, but petitioner wanted its own translator as a double check.  This could not be arranged on short notice, and the witness was not aviable for another deposition in the U.S. in the near future.  The parties approached to the Board for guidance, and the petitioner wanted reimbursement for its wasted costs.   The Board told the parties to work things out, and authorized the petitioner to move for its deposition costs if agreement could not be reached.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by Bryan Wheelock. Bookmark the permalink.

About Bryan Wheelock

Education
J.D., Washington University in St. Louis
B.S.E. in Mechanical Engineering, Duke University

Bryan Wheelock’s practice includes preparation and prosecution of patent and trademark applications and drafting of intellectual property agreements, including non-compete agreements. He has brought and defended lawsuits in federal and state courts relating to intellectual property and has participated in seizures of counterfeit and infringing goods.

Bryan prepares and prosecutes U.S. and foreign patent applications for medical devices, mechanical and electromechanical devices, manufacturing machinery and processes, metal alloys and other materials. He also does a substantial amount of patentability searching, trademark availability searching and patent and trademark infringement studies.

In addition to his practice at Harness Dickey, Bryan is an Adjunct Professor at Washington University School of Law and Washington University School of Engineering.