Mentor Assessment #1

Name: Abel Philips

Date: 03/17/17
Topic: Patent Law
Mentor: Kumar Vinnakota
Preview:
This Mentor Assessment (#1) describes the status of my final work, what I have recently
learned, and what I am currently working on. Mr. Vinnakota was unable to be present at the
office today due to travel for work. However, I was still able to speak with Mr. Janik, his partner,
and Mr. Hsu, an associate, about various topics in patent law and plan some steps for the
documentary I am working on. I completed a large amount of work done today that will be
useful in the following weeks.
Current Plans:
I arrived a few moments before ten in the morning at the law office. I was surprised to
find that Mr. Vinnakota suddenly had to go on a trip out of state. Despite what seemed like an
initial setback, I made the best of the situation. Mr. Vinnakota had left me the task of discovering,
compiling, and finalizing an introduction to my documentary. The introduction would introduce,
in a simple manner, complex legal terms and legislation. By speaking at length with Mr. Hsu I
could better plan the following weeks and what I should do to complete my documentary.
I completed the introductions research today. I needed to find a way to express myself
without becoming verbose, and, unable to connect with the science, I used historical facts and
simplified definitions to complete the introduction on time. I need Mr. Vinnakota to give it a
quick look over before I begin recording audio and finding visuals for the documentary.
I was also able to successfully plan what questions I would be asking Mr. Janik and Mr.
Hsu next week. Both will be providing a legal perspective for my documentary that is currently
lacking. I have ordered some better equipment to make filming an easier task going forward. I
could plan my documentary questions through the information that I learned from Mr. Hsu.
Lessons Learned:
1. Shortcomings of the current patent court system in the United States. The federal court
system has solved many issues in the legal system and reduced the strain on the Supreme
Court by reducing how many patent cases they see. However, some districts interpret law
in various ways, meaning some districts may be more difficult for a defendant to win in.
2. Media portrayal of patent litigation as black and white. It is easy for late night comedy
shows to poke fun at the Texan juries that see these cases and at the small caveats in the
law that allow a client to move their case to Marshall, Texas. However, these shows often
forget good aspects of the system. If one was to file a case in a corporations
headquarters town they are almost guaranteed to lose as they have to surmount a large
hurdle of bias against themselves. To prevent corporation or startup from having to fight a
war of attrition, such laws came into existence.
3. Universities can possibly be considered patent trolls as the research grants they grant
students come with the caveat that any patents that come from the research will belong to
the university as well. To get a better understanding from a universitys perspective I plan
on talking to a coordinator of grants and research at a university. As I am visiting UT
Austin next week, I am trying to find a person I could speak to while there. As Mr.
Vinnakota went to their law school, I am looking into whether he may know a contact.
Reflection:
I learned and accomplished a lot today. I have a good idea of an introduction to the video,
created plans to speak to a university representative and attorneys, and purchased some
useful equipment. One main aspect of the video I want to work on is a storyboard. I will most
likely do this next week.