United States: In The Crosshairs: District Courts Utilize Gunn To Dismiss Patent-Related Legal Malpractice Claims For Lack Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

In an opinion and order dated May 7, 2013, the Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a legal malpractice action alleging that a law firm and one of its lawyers (the "Law Firm") violated certain regulations governing lawyers who practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the "USPTO"). In so doing, Judge Goldberg became the latest district court judge to rely upon the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Gunn v. Minton to conclude that the federal courts do not possess subject matter jurisdiction to hear legal malpractice actions relating to patent cases.

Lice Lifters, LLC v. Barrack, No. 12-5777 (E.D. Pa.) involved a dispute between Ilene Steinberg and Michele Barrack, each a 50 percent owner of Lice Lifters, a company that provides lice removal services.1 When they formed Lice Lifters, Steinberg and Barrack entered into an Operating Agreement pursuant to which Steinberg agreed to contribute to the company certain intellectual property; namely, a topical solution and process that Steinberg had developed for the removal of lice. Lice Lifters hired the Law Firm to provide the company with various legal services. Among other things, the Law Firm pursued an application in the USPTO to obtain a patent on the intellectual property.

During the two years following the formation of Lice Lifters, the relationship between Steinberg and Barrack deteriorated to the point where Barrack, in her own name and on behalf of the company, initiated a lawsuit against Steinberg in state court. The suit alleged that Steinberg had breached the Operating Agreement and violated her fiduciary duties to the company. The Law Firm represented both Lice Lifters and Barrack in the state court action.

In response, Steinberg, in her own name and on behalf of Lice Lifters, sued Barrack and the Law Firm in federal court. The suit alleged, among other claims, that Barrack had infringed Lice Lifters' copyrights and trademarks and breached the Operating Agreement. With respect to the Law Firm, Steinberg claimed that, in the proceeding in the USPTO to obtain a patent on the invention that Steinberg had assigned to Lice Lifters, the Law Firm was representing Steinberg and, therefore, owed her a fiduciary duty.2 Steinberg alleged that the Law Firm breached that fiduciary duty by representing Barrack in Barrack's state court lawsuit against Steinberg.

After Steinberg and Barrack settled their disputes out of court, Steinberg moved to amend her complaint to state a single claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the Law Firm. The Law Firm opposed the motion to amend, arguing, among other things, that the amendment would be futile because the federal court lacked jurisdiction over Steinberg's sole claim — a state law legal malpractice claim between non-diverse parties.

In response, Steinberg argued that her malpractice claim was based on the Law Firm's alleged violation of federal law; namely, provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR") that set forth the standards of conduct for lawyers who practice before the USPTO. Specifically, Steinberg cited to 37 C.F.R. § 10.66, which provides that:

(a) A practitioner shall decline proffered employment if the exercise of the practitioner's independent professional judgment in behalf of a client will be or is likely to be adversely affected by the acceptance of the proffered employment, or if it would be likely to involve the practitioner in representing differing interests [and] (b) A practitioner shall not continue multiple employment if the exercise of the practitioner's independent professional judgment in behalf of a client will be or is likely to be adversely affected by the practitioner's representation of another client, or if it would be likely to involve the practitioner in representing differing interests... .

According to Steinberg, the Law Firm violated these CFR provisions by accepting a representation adverse to her (the state court action) while concurrently representing her in the USPTO. Therefore, argued Steinberg, her claim involved a question of federal law over which the court had subject matter jurisdiction.

While Steinberg's motion for leave to amend her complaint was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Gunn v. Minton, No. 11-1118, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 1612 (Feb. 20, 2013). In Gunn, the owner of a patent brought a malpractice action against the lawyers he hired to pursue an infringement suit. The patent owner claimed that, due to his former lawyers' alleged malpractice, his infringement claim was dismissed and his patent was invalidated. By the time the Gunn case reached the Supreme Court, the sole issue before the Court was "whether a state law claim alleging legal malpractice in the handling of a patent case must be brought in federal court" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which provides the federal courts with jurisdiction over actions arising under the laws of the United States, and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), which provides the federal courts with exclusive jurisdiction over claims relating to patents.

The Court in Gunn began its analysis by recognizing that the federal courts have original jurisdiction over a "special and small category" of claims that, although founded in state law, are nevertheless deemed to "arise under" federal law for purposes of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). Specifically, "federal jurisdiction over a state law claim will lie if a federal issue is: (1) necessarily raised, (2) actually disputed, (3) substantial, and (4) capable of resolution in federal court without disrupting the federal-state balance approved by Congress."

Applying those factors to the claim before it, the Gunn Court held that the federal issue in the case — whether the patent owner would have prevailed on his infringement claim but for the alleged malpractice of his counsel — was not "substantial" because it was of no importance to the federal patent law system as a whole. The Court also held that resolution of the claim by a federal court would disrupt the federal-state balance because the states have an especially strong interest in regulating the lawyers and other professionals they license. Indeed, based on its analysis in the Gunn case, the Court was comfortable predicting that "state legal malpractice claims based on underlying patent matters will rarely, if ever, arise under federal patent law for purposes of § 1338(a)."

Judge Goldberg had no difficulty concluding that, under the rationale of the Gunn Court, the federal courts did not have jurisdiction to hear Steinberg's malpractice claim against the Law Firm. Judge Goldberg held that "the federal issue implicated by Steinberg's state law claim for breach of fiduciary duty is not a 'substantial' one [because] the provisions of the CFR relied upon by Plaintiff merely incorporate common state-law duties that an attorney owes to a client." Judge Goldberg also held that resolution of Steinberg's claims would not be of importance to the federal patent law system as a whole because "to the extent resolution of a federal issue will be required, the inquiry would be fact-specific and relevant only to the parties." Having concluded that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, Judge Goldberg dismissed Steinberg's claims against the Law Firm.

Judge Goldberg's opinion added to a growing body of post-Gunn rulings that have dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction malpractice actions against patent attorneys. For instance, in Axcess International, Inc. v. Baker Botts, L.L.P., No. 10-cv-1383 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 12, 2013), the court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction claims that a law firm violated the USPTO's ethics rules by obtaining patents on similar technology for two different clients. The court noted that "to find federal jurisdiction merely because the plaintiff can allege a violation of a USPTO Rule (that will in most cases be a violation of a similar state rule) would effectively eliminate the Supreme Court's holding in Gunn and circumvent state jurisdiction." See also Patriot Universal Holding, LLC v. McConnell, No. 12-C-0907, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49596 (E.D. Wis. Apr. 5, 2013) (holding that, in light of Gunn, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim that its former law firm breached its fiduciary duties to plaintiff by assisting plaintiff's competitors with patent matters); Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory v. Ropes & Gray LLP, No. 11-cv-10128 (D. Mass. Mar. 14, 2013) (holding that Gunn required dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of legal malpractice claim based on patent issues); Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Townsend Townsend and Crew LLP, No. 10-cv-2011, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32586 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2013) (relying on Gunn to remand patent malpractice action to state court).


1. Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP was counsel for the Law Firm in the Lice Lifters case.

2. The Law Firm denied that it represented Steinberg in the USPTO and, therefore, disputed that it owed Steinberg a fiduciary duty. To the contrary, the Law Firm explained that, although Steinberg was identified as the inventor of the intellectual property in the patent application it was pursuing in the USPTO, the Law Firm's client was Lice Lifters, the assignee of the intellectual property, not Steinberg. The Court never reached this issue.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.