The firm’s expertise in worldwide protection of intellectual property extends to related areas including litigation support, licensing and technology-related agreements, and trade secrets, We provide opinions on patent infringement risk analysis, patent invalidity, scope of patent claims, invention novelty, and patent searches on invention patentability, state-of-the-art that helps clients in their research and development of products for commercial application, and that will assist in the enforcement of patent and intellectual property rights, as well as in defending against such rights. Senior members of the firm are experienced in and are available as expert witnesses in support of IP litigation.
Patents are our strong suit. Patent law is what we do. Our primary emphasis lies in patent prosecution. We at Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP have years of experience filing and obtaining patents in the United States and around the world. The U.S. patent system distinguishes among three different types of patents:
• Utility Patents are directed to a useful process, a machine, a manufacture, or a composition of matter. Patents may be awarded to improvements. A “process” is the same as a “method.” The term “manufacture” refers to articles which are made.
• Design Patents protect original and ornamental designs for articles of manufacture. Designs do not protect the function but the looks of a thing.
• Plant Patents protect asexually reproduced, distinct varieties of plants, including cultivated spores, mutants, hybrids, newly found seedlings.
Opinions/Searches:A considerable part of our work deals with expert opinions. We keep up-to-date on all developments in the intellectual property (IP) law arena, and we are able to provide timely advice concerning all such developments. We prepare infringement opinions. clearance opinions, freedom-to-operate searches, memoranda of IP law…
Patent-Eligibility:Not everything is patentable. An abstract idea is not patentable. A law of nature is not patentable. Something that is not useful is not patentable and, in some cases, even if something is useful, it may not be patent-eligible. See our detailed memo on “Bilski.”
Publication:Patent applications are published 18 months after the filing date. In order to patent an invention, you need to describe it in detail. Since the description of the invention will become public, it is not possible to keep it secret. If you wish to keep your idea to yourself, you should consider squirreling it away in a drawer, or keeping it confidential by way of a Trade Secret.
Provisional Patent Application:The application may first be filed in the form of a provisional application. This is not really an application for a patent, because it will not be examined and no patent can issue from a provisional. Consider it a time stamp, instead. It will establish two things for you: it will be an official acknowledgement that you had the invention/idea at least as early as when you deposit the provisional application, and it will establish your right of priority with regard to foreign and international applications.
Non-Provisional Patent Application:This is the real application, the application that will be examined and, hopefully, mature into a patent. The non-provisional patent application is filed together with an oath or declaration by the inventor stating that he/she is indeed the inventor. The application is then subjected to an examination by a patent examiner at the Patent Office.
Examination:The patent examiner reviews the application in light of the formal requirements (see below). The specification must contain an “enabling” disclosure of the invention and the claims must be clear and definite. The examiner also compares the claimed invention with the prior art (earlier patents and other technical literature). If the invention is not new or it is obvious over the prior art, the patent examiner refuses to issue a patent.
Office Action:Upon completing her review, the patent examiner issues an Office action – usually a rejection of the application. The most common rejection in the first Office action is based on the patent examiner’s allegation that the claims define something that is not new or something that is an obvious variation of something that is known form the prior art.
Response/Amendment:The applicant answers the Office action by responding to each of the examiner’s objections, either by pointing out the examiner’s errors or changing the application to satisfy the objections. It is often necessary to add limiting language to the claims so as to remove the prior art rejections. The additions must be within the bounds of the original specification, i.e., no “new matter” can / should be added.
Notice of Allowance/Issue of Patent:When the patent examiner is satisfied that all requirements have been met, the claims are allowed. Subject to the payment of an issue fee, the Patent Office issues a patent.
Patent Term – Maintenance Fees:A utility patent may be valid for a maximum of 20 years, counted from the date of the first application. Maintenance fees are due every four years. If these fees are not paid, the patent expires. This means that the public is then free to use the invention. Design patents are valid for 14 years, counted from the date of issue. No maintenance fees are due for design patents.
Our goal is to achieve the best possible protection for our clients. Whether your work is best protected by way of a trademark, trade dress, copyright, or design patent –or even all of these — we shall advise you with your interests in mind and the objectives of your particular business. Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP can secure your rights in every aspect of trademark and copyright protection, including all phases of federal and state registration, opposition, cancellation, litigation support, and enforcement procedures. Our experts are fully versed in the application process in the United States, in the international filing systems, and in a multitude of countries around the world.
Any word, name, or symbol qualifies for trademark protection if it is used by a person (or that person has a bona fide intention to use the mark) in commerce to identify and distinguish his goods/services from those made by others and to indicate the source, even if the source is unknown. The purpose of the trademark law is to protect consumers from confusion as to the source of the goods and services by allowing producers exclusive rights in a mark reflecting goodwill and quality reputation they have developed.
By the way, a service mark is also a trademark. Service marks are marks that are used in the context of services. Since many marks are used for goods and for services, the words trademark or mark are generically used for all marks, including service marks.
The trademark owner is the first to use the mark in a given geographic area in connection with particular goods or services. State common law grants ownership by virtue of being the first person to use the trademark. Federal law does not create trademark ownership, nor does federal law preempt state law. The federal Lanham Act, however, provides a federal registration system for trademarks which are used in interstate commerce. In addition, the Lanham Act provides procedural rights and enforcement mechanisms. Any infringement of a trademark must be based on the likelihood of (and actual) consumer confusion.
The primary distinction between a trademark and a copyright is as follows: a copyright is established as soon as the work is fixed (pen to paper, music to tape, photograph on film/card, etc.). There’s no need to register. The rights attach immediately. Registration is only required if the copyright owner wishes to enforce his/her rights in court. No rights attach to a trademark simply upon creation. In the context of trademarks, use is the key. A trademark need not be original or creative; trademarks do not fall into the public domain after a predefined period of time; and the exclusiveness of use is limited by geographic area and by the type of product and service. For more, check out the FAQ section at the Trademark Office.
Do not use the symbol ® or the designation “registered trademark” until the mark is actually registered. If you do, the registration may be refused or it may be taken away.
The United States Trademark Office accepts applications for trademarks that may be based on any of several different filing bases. The four primary categories are:
The mark has been used in commerce which the U.S. Congress may regulate, namely, interstate commerce or importation into the U.S. from abroad. The applicant must state that the mark has been used and indicate the exact dates of such use (i.e., the first time that the mark was used anywhere in the world and the first time the mark was used in, or imported into, the United States. The two dates may be the same).
The mark has not yet been used in commerce, but the applicant has a bona fide intent to use the mark in such commerce. The mark will be registered by the U.S. Trademark Office only after the mark has been used and the applicant files a corresponding declaration.
An applicant may claim the priority of a foreign trademark application under § 44(d) if the U.S. application is filed within six months of the foreign filing or the priority of a foreign trademark registration under § 44(e). The applicant is required to state that he/she has a bona fide intent to use the mark in U.S. commerce and the mark will be registered by the U.S. Trademark Office only after a certified copy of the foreign registration has been filed.
The owner of an international registration may file a request for extension of protection of that registration to the United States. The request for extension to the United States may be included in the international application, or in a subsequent designation made after the International Bureau registers the mark. The request for extension will be electronically transmitted to the U.S. Trademark Office, where the request for extension of protection to the United States will be referred to as a “§66(a) application.”
A mark is generic when it is a term commonly used as the name or description of a certain kind of good. In determining whether or not the term is generic, one of three factors must be fulfilled: First, the word/expression has such an inherent meaning in ordinary language or the public uses it to identify goods of other producers as well. Second, the term is a compound word which, while not previously used, suggests the content of the description. For instance, the word “screenwipe” connotes the use and the constitution of the goods, if used for articles to be used for wiping screens. Third, the primary significance test ascertains the primary meaning of the term to the prospective purchaser of the product.
Where a mark specifically describes a characteristic or ingredient of an article, it is considered descriptive. Such a term may become a valid trademark upon acquiring a secondary meaning: the mark has become distinctive of the producer’s goods and/or the primary significance in the mind of the consumer is not the product but the producer. Here, the mark no longer identifies the product but the producer and his goodwill.
The protection afforded by a descriptive mark is not absolute. Other producers may still use the word in its generic form and to denote generic products. This is a concept similar to the copyright fair use defense. However, the competing producer must not use the mark in its non-generic sense (e.g. Cat Chow® for cat food). A descriptive mark can be registered only after the mark has been used virtually exclusively in the context of the goods for an extended period of time.
In some cases, a mark that has been categorized as “merely descriptive” may be recorded on the Supplemental Register. After five years on the Supplemental Register and after the mark has been used “substantially exclusively” for five years, the “merely descriptive” mark is said to have acquired secondary meaning and the mark may be registered on the Principal Register, subject to the filing of a new trademark application.
A term which suggests an ingredient or characteristic of the product is suggestive. Upon being exposed to the mark, the observer or listener must use imagination and perception to determine the nature of the goods. Suggestive marks are protectible even if they have not acquired secondary meaning (e.g. Terminix® for pest control).
The best mark is an arbitrary mark. A word, for instance, which is not defined in a dictionary as having a meaning in a modern language is considered arbitrary. An onomatopoeic expression (a word which phonetically imitates a natural sound) may be considered arbitrary, even if it suggests the product. An arbitrary mark allows the highest level of protection. The word either has no meaning in the language at all (it is “coined”, e.g. Kodak®, Exxon®) or it has no meaning in connection with the goods (e.g. Crest® Toothpaste).
a. Name of Trademark Owner/Applicant:
Name and Nationality, if an individual; or Name of company and state of incorporation.
b. Address of applicant.
c. Telephone Number of the applicant.
d. E-mail address of the applicant.
e. Name of the mark you wish to apply for:
Do you want to apply for a word mark, a logo (design) or both.
If you want to apply for a logo, we need a .jpg or .pdf of the logo exactly as you intend to use it.
Do you wish to claim any of the colors in your logo?
f. List of goods/services use with the mark:
Please list all of the goods/services that you want to use the mark for with their common commercial name. Here’s a link to the
government’s acceptable identification manual for goods and services.
Please note that all goods and services are classified within 50 classes or groups. For each group of goods for which your goods or services fall into, you will be charged a government filing fee (presently $350.00 per class).
g. Are you already using the mark in commerce (e.g. selling or advertising the goods)? We will need the following dates of use:
Date of First Use anywhere; and
Date of First Use in commerce.
Otherwise state your filing basis as an “intent-to-use” filing basis (e.g. reserving a name).
h. If you are claiming use (e.g. sale of goods), you must provide a specimen showing the mark on the goods or in close proximity to the services.
Please refer to our guide How to Select the Right Specimens of Use for your Trademark.
An initial trademark registration lasts for 6 years. To extend the life of the trademark registration, a first maintenance filing must be filed between the fifth and sixth years after the date of registration and must include a signed Declaration of Use, at least one specimen per class showing use of the mark, and the approximate government filing fee. A trademark renewal is due between the ninth and tenth years after the registration date and again must include a signed Declaration of Use, at least one specimen per class showing use of the mark and the appropriate government filing fee. Subsequent renewals are due every ten years after the registration date, i.e. as long as a mark is in use in commerce the registration will stay valid assuming you continuously file the proper maintenance forms.
In order to become copyrightable, a work must be fixed in tangible medium of expression. § 101. It may be fixed in words, numbers, notes, sounds, pictures, any other graphic or symbolic indicia. It may be in written, printed, photographic, sculptural, punched, magnetic, or other stable form. A live broadcast is protected because it is simultaneously recorded. A work is fixed if the fixation takes place simultaneously. Video games are protected because they are fixed in the computer memory.
We at Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP can help you register your copyright and we will also advise you on how to properly claim and hold your copyright. You should know that registration is not absolutely necessary. Your copyright is established immediately upon the creation of your work: When you put pen to paper, when you record your song, when you paint that picture, or when you click the camera, you create and claim your copyright. If you wish to enforce it, however, you will have to show a registration from the Register of Copyrights (the Copyright Office).
The United States adheres to the Berne Convention. Since 1978 it is no longer necessary to register your copyright. But, you should always place a copyright notice, whenever possible. Example of a copyright notice: © 2010 Owner
Following is a brief primer on copyright law. We recommend that you peruse the website of the Copyright Office. Their circulars are very helpful.
Originality Requirement
In order to be copyrightable, a work must be original. Creativity is inherent in originality. Originality, however, in contrast with patents, does not include novelty, ingenuity, aesthetic merit. For example, a telephone directory has very limited protection, while a book that is written “from scratch” will likely enjoy full protection. Facts are not copyrightable, compilations are. Facts do not originate from the author. Facts – scientific, historical, biographical, and news of the day – are in the public domain and are available to every person.
Not Copyrightable:
According to the Copyright Office, “[w]ords and short phrases such as names, titles, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering or coloring; mere listing of ingredients or contents,” are not subject to copyright.
Section 103 of the Copyright Law also does not allow protection for an “idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, discovery.”
Derivative Works:
A derivative work is a variation or a new-medium-adaptation of an original work. To receive copyright protection, the derivative work must be more than “merely a trivial variation” of original work. The author of the derivative work needs the permission of the original owner who holds the copyright in the original work.
Copyright Infringement
According to Section 106, the copyright owner has the exclusive right to do and to authorize: reproduce in copies or phonorecords, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to public by sale, lending, rental, transfer . . . , perform/display publicly. To prove infringement, the plaintiff must show that the defendant copied from the copyrighted work and that the defendant took more of the copyrighted material than allowed.
Fair Use
Section 107 carves out a wide-ranging exception which allows anyone to make fair use of the materials. The fair use test has four factors: (1) Nature of infringing work (non-commercial, educational?). (2) Nature of copyrighted work (fact driven, more artistic, exclusively artistic). (3) Amount/substantiality of portion used in relation to copyrighted work. (4) Effect on the market, including potential market (no need to show actual harm). All four factors must be taken into account.
F. Donald Paris (Don) retired in 2002 from the Law Department of ExxonMobil Corporation, where he specialized in intellectual property law with emphasis on the protection of intellectual property (IP) vis a vis patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, technology transfer through licensing and related agreements, and acquisition of technology through research and development agreements and licensing. Don counseled and supported clients in all aspects of intellectual property including protecting and managing intellectual and proprietary assets, establishing IP programs, filing and prosecuting U.S. and non-U.S. patent applications, drafting and negotiating worldwide agreements for licensing technology and patent rights and for research and development and joint venture projects, and license, guarantee, engineering, secrecy, consulting, and other agreements related to licensing and acquisition of proprietary technology. He also helped develop IP guidelines and policies for corporate management, and counseled clients in areas of U.S. Export Control and Foreign Corrupt Practice Act. Mr. Paris’ responsibilities were geographically diverse, including the United States, Canada, Central and South America, United Kingdom, Europe, Far East, Australia, India, Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Taiwan, Russia, and China.
Don received a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) in 1962 and a Juris Doctor from Georgetown University Law Center in 1966. He also attended Columbia University Parker School of International Law. At NJIT, he was a member of Eta Kappa Nu, the electrical engineering honor society, and was on the Dean’s List. Mr. Paris was a member of Phi Alpha Delta legal fraternity.
Before joining ExxonMobil, Mr. Paris was employed as a Patent Attorney with The Singer Company and was a Patent Examiner with the United States Patent Office from 1962 to 1966.
Mr. Paris is a Registered U.S. Patent Attorney. Professionally, he is a member of the State Bars of New York, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia. He also is a member of the Licensing Executives Society, and past member of the Intellectual Property Section of the American Bar Association and the New Jersey Intellectual Property Law Association.
Don was very active in community life when he resided in New Jersey for more than 35 years. He was a member, including President and Vice President, of the local and regional school boards of education for 18 years and on various township committees and boards, and an active participant and coach in youth programs. Mr. Paris was selected as Citizen of the Year by the local Clark B’nai B’rith Chapter and participated in Leadership New Jersey.
Don and his wife, Maxine, now reside in Delray Beach, Florida, and spend part of their time at Beach Haven, Long Beach Island, New Jersey. They have three sons, Drs. Scot, Jay and Brian and six grandchildren.
David W. Barman holds undergraduate degrees in Chemistry and Music from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, B.S. 1990 and was a member of the inaugural class at the Florida International University College of Law in Miami Florida, JD., 2005. David earned Dean’s List honors at each of UNC and FIU. He is a member of the Florida Bar and is admitted to practice in Florida, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Supreme Court of the United States, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Mr. Barman’s scientific experience includes, medical, personal care chemistry, and pharmaceutical research. He has patented inventions in these and many other areas. Some of his current clients have patented mechanical, computer, medical, and sports related articles just to name a few. His clients also include Patent Attorneys who are in need of a patent professional in the prosecution of chemical and pharmaceutical patents.
David is not only a scientist, but an inventor as well. This rare combination of skills: scientist, inventor, and patent professional, allows Mr. Barman to assist numerous clients in many different fields.
David W. Barman is also professor at FIU in Miami where he teaches Business Law in the College of Business.
David is also an accomplished musician. He attended UNC Chapel Hill on a music scholarship, toured Europe with the Spirit of America Marching Band, and toured the United States as a member of the Garfield Cadets Drum and Bugle Corps.
Ralph E. Locher was born in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania, USA. He has lived in Florida since 1996 and makes his home in Cooper City together with his wife Shelly and their children Tonya, Kristie, and Nicholas. Mr. Locher received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Management from Northern Illinois University, 1983, B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from Southern Illinois University – Carbondale in 1986, and a Juris Doctorate in Law from St. Louis University (cum laude 1994).
Mr. Locher is a member of the Florida Bar, the Illinois Bar, the Missouri Bar, and is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Mr. Locher was one of Florida’s first board certified intellectual property law attorneys. Mr. Locher is a member of the American Bar Association, Section of Intellectual Property Law Association of Florida and has specialized in only intellectual property matters since 1996.
Mr. Locher specializes in patents, trademarks, patent interference, patent appeals, and international patent prosecution. Mr. Locher is conversational in German. His primary areas of expertise are in engineering, with an emphasis on discrete components, circuits, integrated circuits and semi-conductor devices; thermodynamic processes, including fluid flow, power plant processes, heat exchange, and energy conversion; exhaust gas purification (filtering, catalytic conversion); nuclear technology, coatings; electromagnetic devices (sensors, actuators, motors), digital and analog signal processing, communications (telecommunications apparatus and signal processing); computer engineering, including software, hardware, and process modeling; digital logic circuitry, digital/analog interfaces; high temperature superconductivity, optics systems; and automotive technology, including exhaust systems and exhaust gas purification, control systems, transmission and engine control, safety systems, automotive electronics; and business method patents.
Before venturing into patent law Mr. Locher was an aerospace engineer at Boeing/McDonnell Douglas Corporation for nine years where he worked on electronic systems for F-15 and F-18 fighter aircraft. In addition, Mr. Locher has two years general management experience with Pepsico Corporation, Pizza Hut division.
Werner H. Stemer grew up in the Montafon Valley in Vorarlberg, Austria. He has lived in Florida since 1984 and makes his home in Fort Lauderdale. Mr. Stemer holds degrees from the University of Innsbruck, Austria (M.A.), from Florida International University (B.S., physics), from Kennedy Western University (Ph.D.), and from Nova Southeastern University (J.D., magna cum laude).
Mr. Stemer has more than thirty years experience in patent law and he is board certified as an expert in intellectual property law (Florida Bar Board of Legal Specialization). His primary expertise lies in the prosecution of patents and trademarks, patent appeals, and international (PCT) patent applications. A substantial amount of his time is spent on patent reexaminations, clearance opinions, and infringement opinions. Mr. Stemer’s primary technical expertise lies in general and applied physics, in physical chemistry, mechanical and electrical engineering, computer engineering, and software applications.
Werner Stemer has published several articles and commentaries in English and in German, and he has lectured on a wide range of corresponding topics in Europe and in the United States. His publications include:
• Patentschutz in wichtigen Exportmärkten, Apfelthaler, et al.
(publ.), Facultas Verlag, Vienna, Austria 2008.
• Das Wirtschaftsrecht der USA für Unternehmensgründer,
Apfelthaler, Stemer, et al., Verlag Österreich, Vienna, Austria 2003.
• Not With a Bang, but a Whimper: The Long-Awaited Festo Decision
– Patent Café, http://www.patentcafe.com
• The Doctrine of Equivalents after Hilton Davis and Markman, and a Proposal for Further Clarification,
22 Nova L. Rev. 783 (1998).
• Protection of Intellectual Property through Patents, Trademarks, and Copyright, Dissertation,
Kennedy Western University Press (1997).
• U.S. Warenzeichen für österreichische Anmelder, Internatiale Wirtschaft
(published by the Austrian Chamber of Commerce.
Werner H. Stemer also holds the position of the Austrian Honorary Consul General, head of mission of the Austrian Consulate Miami. For information, please visit the website of the Austrian Consulate.
Laurence A. Greenberg has been the Managing Partner of the Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP law firm since 1990. His professional efforts are mainly directed toward advising clients, educating colleagues and practicing in the areas of Intellectual Property prosecution, as well as litigation and dispute resolution.
Mr. Greenberg was born in Los Angeles, lived in New York for many years and relocated to Florida in 1981. He graduated from Brooklyn College in 1971 and, after several years in business, graduated from Pace University School of Law in 1981. He and his wife Leslie have lived in Hollywood, Florida for many years where they have raised their four children.
Mr. Greenberg was registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office as a Patent Agent in 1979 and as an Attorney in 1982. He was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1982 and to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in 1983. He is also a member of the American Bar Association and the New York and Florida Intellectual Property Law Associations.
Although Mr. Greenberg’s educational background is in Physics, he has had years of experience in the fields of Electrical, Mechanical and Chemical patent prosecution in general, and more specifically dealing with semi-conductor components, circuits, computer hardware and software, communications, automotive electronics and devices, power generation, environmental engineering including exhaust gas purification, printing, textile machinery, postage equipment, medical equipment, household appliances, optics, thermodynamics, electromechanical and electrochemical devices, material science as well as carbon, graphite and rubber products.
Mr. Greenberg has been a lecturer in the field of Intellectual Property Law, with particular emphasis on the Patent Cooperation Treaty and in explaining the nuances and changes in U.S. Patent and Trademark law and practice to attorneys, inventors and business people in the United States, and to Intellectual Property practitioners abroad. He has participated in numerous state and federal suits and appeals before government bodies and agencies as well as District Courts and the CAFC.
Mr. Greenberg is AV® Peer Review Rated and is Board Certified in Intellectual Property Law.
Mr. Greenberg is fluent in German and is involved in local politics, as well as charitable and community organizations.
This privacy notice discloses the privacy practices for patentusa.com. This privacy notice applies solely to information collected by this web site.
It will notify you of the following: What personally identifiable information is collected from you through the web site, how it is used and with whom
it may be shared. What choices are available to you regarding the use of your data. The security procedures in place to protect the misuse of your information.
How you can correct any inaccuracies in the information.
Information Collection, Use, and Sharing.
We are the sole owners of the information collected on this site. We only have access to/collect information that you voluntarily give us via email or other direct contact from you.
We will not sell or rent this information to anyone. We will use your information to respond to you, regarding the reason you contacted us. We will not share your information with
any third party outside of our organization, other than as requested by you.
Your Access to and Control Over Information.
You may opt out of any future contacts from us at any time. You can do the following at any time by contacting us via the email address or phone number given on our website:
See what data we have about you, if any. Change/correct any data we have about you.
Have us delete any data we have about you. Express any concern you have about our use of your data.
Information Sent by Way of the Internet is NOT Secure.
Any information sent to the firm by Internet e-mail or through the website is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis. Any information you send the firm over the Internet, either through the firm’s website or via e-mail is done at your own risk.
Sending Information Does Not Form an Attorney-Client Relationship.
Transmission of information from this website does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the firm, nor is it intended to do so. The transmission of the website, in part or in whole, and/or any communication with us via Internet e-mail through this site does not constitute or create an attorney-client relationship between us and any recipients.
If you feel that we are not abiding by this privacy policy, you should contact us immediately via telephone at 954 925-1100 or via email info@patentusa.com.
• No Attorney-Client Relationship Formed:
All materials on this Web site are provided by Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP for informational purposes only and do not contain legal advice, legal opinions or any other form of advice regarding any specific facts or circumstances. The transmission and receipt of information contained on the Web site neither form nor constitute an attorney-client relationship with Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP, or any of its partners, associates or consultants. Any use of the information contained on this Web site or transmittal of information from emails on this Web site do not give you a reasonable basis for a belief that that use creates an attorney client relationship.
• Transmission of Information:
If you would like Lerner Greenberg Stemer LLP to represent you, the best way to initiate a discussion about that representation is to call the firm at 954.925.1100. It is important that we not create a conflict of interest between you and any of our current or past clients. This protects both you and them. Therefore, under no circumstance should you provide us with information pertaining to a matter without first speaking to one of our attorneys and receiving confirmation that the appropriate conflict checks have been cleared and the firm determines that it is otherwise able to accept the engagement.