Year: 2016

Overseas clients can be a steady and significant income stream for US attorneys. Typically, foreign applicants, who have already begun prosecution in their own countries, require less hands-on management than domestic filers. Given the added difficulty of shopping for services across borders, they are also more likely to be loyal once a steady relationship has […]Continue reading

A monolingual attorney’s guide to challenging an erroneous translation   Most patent attorneys have seen their share of sketchy translations. Machine translations routinely end up in prosecution histories and, on occasion, are even submitted to court. Likewise, translations produced with more concern for price and speed than expertise, which may have been suitable for getting […]Continue reading

A monolingual attorney’s guide to determining the accuracy of a translation Patent attorneys may have concerns about the accuracy of a translation for any number of reasons. Your suspicions may have been raised by the warning signs described in the previous installment of this series. You may just have a hunch that something is not […]Continue reading

A Monolingual Attorney’s Guide to Assessing the Reliability of a Translation Patent attorneys are increasingly aware that translations can be challenged in litigation, IPR proceedings, and even USPTO prosecution. Even if you are careful to source expert translations for foreign language documents that land on your desk, some cases come with their own translations. Attorneys working on litigation often […]Continue reading