Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Patent and Trademark Office (P.T.O.)
CAMERON WEIFFENBACH DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
ENROLLMENT AND DISCIPLINE
v.
DAVID F. GOULD, RESPONDENT
Proceeding No. D89-2
October 17, 1989
Donald J. Quigg
Assistant Secretary and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
FINAL ORDER
*1 The Director
and David F. Gould (Respondent), being fully advised, desire to settle this
disciplinary matter without the need for serving a complaint, filing an answer,
or a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. The Director and Respondent
therefore present tothe Commissioner this agreed- upon FINAL ORDER as settlement of the
above-identified disciplinary proceeding.
The Director has
investigated possible violations of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Code
of Professional Responsibility by Respondent in connection with his conduct
respecting suspension from the practice of law for knowingly assisting a
suspended attorney in the practice of law.
The Director has
presented the evidence to the Committee on Discipline and the Committee has
found probable cause to bring charges as set forth in the following counts:
COUNT 1
Respondent, having been
suspended from the practice of law by the Supreme Judicial Court of the State
of Maine for, inter alia, knowingly assisting a suspended attorney in the
unauthorized practice of law, engaged in professional misconduct.
1.1 Respondent was
charged in an INFORMATION by the Board Of Overseers of the Bar of the State of
Maine with violating certain Maine Bar Rules; further the INFORMATION alleged,
in essence that Respondent knowingly assisted a suspended attorney in the
unauthorized practice of law and, by doing so, engaged in conduct prejudicial
to the administration of justice; and further, the information alleged that
with respect to the same incident, Respondent handled a legal matter without adequate preparation.
1.2 The Supreme Judicial
Court for Maine, after a hearing, concluded that Respondent engaged in the
conduct as alleged and suspended Respondent from the practice of law in all
courts of Maine for a period of six (6) months.
1.3 Respondent had an
affirmative duty to refrain from conduct for which he could be suspended on
ethical grounds; further, Respondent did not refrain from such conduct; and
still further, said conduct reflects on Respondent's fitness to practice before
the PTO.
1.4 By being suspended
from the practice of law by the Supreme Judicial Court for Maine on ethical
grounds, Respondent engaged in conduct justifying suspension or exclusion under
Part 10, Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations, to wit: 37 CFR 10.23(a) and/or
37 CFR 10.23(c)(5).
COUNT 2
By knowingly not advising
the Director of his suspension from the practice of law in courts of the State
of Maine, Respondent engaged in professional misconduct.
2.1 Paragraphs 1.1
through 1.3 of Count 1 are incorporated herein by reference.
2.2 By virtue of his
suspension from the practice of law by the Supreme Judicial Court for Maine, Respondent was no
longer a member in good standing of the bar of Supreme Judicial Court for
Maine; and further Respondent was precluded from being eligible to be
registered as a patent attorney under 37 CFR 10.6(a).
*2 2.3 Prior to
his suspension, Respondent held himself out in the Maine Bar Journal as being a
"Registered Patent Attorney"; and further, subsequent to his
suspension Respondent held himself out in The Maine Bar Journal as being a
"Patent Engineer."
2.4 Respondent failed
and/or refused to advise the Director of the Office of Enrollment and
Discipline that he had been suspended from the practice of law by the Supreme
Judicial Court for Maine; and further Respondent knew or should have known that
he had failed and/or refused to advise the Director of the same.
2.5 Respondent, by
holding himself out since in or about May, 1988 as being a "Patent
Engineer" knew or should have known that he was precluded from continuing
to be registered as a patent attorney under 37 CFR 10.6(a); and further
Respondent knew or should have known that he failed and/or refused to advise
the Director in writing of any change precluding his continued registration as
a patent attorney under 37 CFR 10.6(a).
2.6 Respondent had an
affirmative duty to advise the Director in writing of any change which would
preclude continued registration as a patent attorney under 37 CFR 10.6(a).
2.7 By knowingly failing
and/or refusing to advise the Director in writing of any change precluding
continued registration as a patent attorney under 37 CFR 10.6, Respondent did
engage in professional misconduct which justifies suspension or exclusion under
Part 10, Title 37, Code of Federal Regulations, to wit: 37 CFR 10.23(c)(14).
SETTLEMENT
For purposes of settling
this disciplinary matter without any determination by the Administrative Law
Judge, and without a complaint, answer, or hearing, the Director and Respondent
have agreed as follows:
1. Respondent
acknowledges that he is aware that the Committee on Discipline has determined,
pursuant to 37 CFR 10.132(a), that there is probable cause to bring charges
against Respondent as specified in Counts 1 and 2, supra.
2. Respondent further
acknowledges that he is entitled:
(i) To be served a
complaint,
(ii) To file an answer
to the complaint, and
(iii) To have a hearing
in this proceeding (37 CFR 10.132(a),
10.132(b), 10.135, 10.136 and 10.144);
and that he hereby
waives his rights to service of a complaint, file an answer, and a hearing in this matter.
3. Respondent freely and
voluntarily admits that the facts in Count 1 and Count 2 are true, and freely
and voluntarily enters a plea to Count 1 and Count 2 of nolo contendere.
4. Respondent
acknowledges that he is not acting under duress or coercion from the Patent and
Trademark Office, and that he is fully aware to the implications of approval
and entry the FINAL ORDER. The FINAL ORDER will be made of record in
Respondent's file together with all information obtained in connection
therewith, and will be considered in dealing with any further complaint or
evidence of misconduct coming to the attention of the Office of Enrollment and
Discipline.
*3 5. Respondent
shall comply with all Disciplinary Rules applicable to attorneys and patent
agents practicing before the Patent and Trademark office.
6. Respondent, having
followed the suspension imposed by the Supreme Judicial Court of the State of
Maine, and having been reinstated to practice law by the duly constituted
authorities of the State of Maine, is no longer under any known impediment to
continue to practice law in the State of Maine.
7. The Director and
Respondent request that the Assistant Secretary and Commissioner of Patent and
Trademark enter the FINAL ORDER.
8. The Director and
Respondent shall bear their own costs.
9. Respondent shall be
publicly reprimanded for his conduct as specified in Counts 1 and 2. This public reprimand shall
take place upon the Commissioner's approval and entry of the FINAL ORDER.
10. The following notice
will be published in Official Gazette:
PUBLIC REPRIMAND
David F. Gould of
Bangor, Maine, whose registration number is 21,029, has been publicly
reprimanded. This action is taken under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 32, and 37
CFR 10.130 and 10.133(g).
11. The Director and Respondent
agree that the FINAL ORDER may be published in its entirety, and the Director
shall, pursuant to 37 CFR 10.159(a), give notice of the reprimand to
appropriate authorities of the State of Maine and appropriate bar associations.
Agreed to:
David F. Gould
Respondent
Date: OCTOBER 12 1989
Agreed to:
Cameron Weiffenbach,
Director Office of Enrollment and Discipline
Date: 10/17/89
Approved and FINAL ORDER
Entered:
Date: SEP 26 1989
Approved and FINAL ORDER Entered:
Donald J. Quigg, Assistant Secretary and
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Date: 10-24-89
14 U.S.P.Q.2d 1331
END OF DOCUMENT