Receive a text message from Avvo with this lawyer's phone number and link to their profile for easier access from your mobile device.
|Award name||Grantor||Date granted|
|With distinction||University of Pacific||2006|
|Director of Intellectual Property||Sanmina-SCI||2007 - 2009|
|Association name||Position name||Duration|
|Intellectual Property Law||Member||2006 - Present|
|San Francisco Intellectual Property Law Association||Member||2006 - Present|
|National Association of Patent Practitioners||Director||2005 - 2007|
|Morris v. Atchity, CACD, Federal Court||Verdict for Plaintiff|
|See all legal cases|
|Washington University School of Law||Intellectual Property and Technology Law||LL.M - Master of Laws||2013|
|McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific||Intellectual Property||JD - Juris Doctor||2005|
|Washington University||Finance||MBA - Master of Business Administration||1993|
|University of Missouri||Chemical Engineering||BS - Bachelor of Science||1980|
|McGeorge School of Law, Univ of Pacific Adv IP Class||M&A Issues in Intellectual Property Transactions||2011|
|National Association of Patent Practitioners||KSR v. Teleflex, Patent Law||2009|
Posted by anonymous
Brian Matlock helped me with an employment law case. He clearly explained the issues, elements, and case law. He went step-by-step over all the individual factors and elements I needed to prove. He was patient, and he helped me understand exactly what facts I needed to show for each element. I highly recommend him for employment law matters.
Posted by anonymous
Brian Matlock did not pay fees to the US and foreign patent offices on time for three of my patent applications even though I paid him on time. When he did pay US PTO fees, Matlock sometimes paid the wrong amount - or paid a fee for a different purpose.
Matlock did not inform me when about office actions at the US PTO which required my signature or additional fee payments. Nor did he respond to US PTO office actions by sending the proper documents before deadlines. The documents he sent contained numerous mistakes or omissions. His attempts to fix his own mistakes caused even bigger problems - and then he tried to bill me for the time he took to fix his own mistakes.
His inactions kept me from extending my patents into several other countries because he did not act before their deadlines. When I discovered he failed to pay the fee and questioned him, he became very belligerent.
When I fired him and hired another lawyer to fix the problems he caused, he delayed in sending my files to the new lawyer by over a month when all he had to do was gather up the documents and walk them two blocks to the other lawyer's office. His delay further exacerbated an already ugly problem because the US PTO needed responses from the new lawyer before specific deadlines.
When I reviewed the problems he caused, I discovered he violated the US PTO's rules on Misconduct 10 separate times. He also violated the State Bar of California's Rules on Professional Misconduct 18 separate times.
The rules he violated are regarding:
1. misappropriation of client's money,
2. failure to pay fees on behalf of client,
3. providing false information to the US PTO,
4. failure to inform client about important events related to client's case,
5. failure to inform client about correspondence from US PTO,
6. failure to inform me when he did act on client's behalf,
7. billing me for work I never requested, and
8. billing me for work to fix his own mistakes.
The actual US PTO Rules on Misconduct he violated are (with multiple violations of some of these rules):
The actual California State Bar rules of Professional Conduct he violated are (with multiple violations of some of these rules):
The US Patent Office contacted me during their investigation into his misconduct. The US PTO wanted evidence he knowingly sent false information to them (i.e. - he lied to the US government), failed to pay fees, and failed to inform me of office actions.
Cash, Check, Credit card