Spotted belatedly at Naked Law is this patent drafting horror:
9. The method of providing user interface displays in an image forming apparatus which is really a bogus claim included amongst real claims, and which should be removed before filing; wherein the claim is included to determine if the inventor actually read the claims and the inventor should instruct the attorneys to remove the claim.
What nutjob did that?! Hilarious. While Geeklawyer sometimes has difficulty getting a punter to respond, an accusation more usually thrown at lawyers, this seems to be a somewhat problematic method of getting attention. If, as Geeklawyer presumes, they had a system to remove this claim before filing, even if the punter didn’t read it, then they fucked up horribly and deserve any professional negligence claim resulting from, e.g., loss of the patent.
Secondly, while IP lawyers don’t generally find patent drafting overly intimidating the inventor and laymen will usually find them fulginous. They will rely on, despite entreaties to the contrary & however unwise, the lawyer to just get on with it and do it right. If one cannot get ones punter’s attention then there is a client management issue that needs urgent resolution. Geeklawyer cannot imagine this punter was a regular one: and one suspects he never will be.
That’s one way to get disbarred, or at least censured. Not to mention sued by the inventor for the fees he paid to have the application drafted.