Articles Blog

Real Lawyer Reacts to Suits (Episode 2 – Cell Phone Patent Problems!)

Real Lawyer Reacts to Suits (Episode 2 – Cell Phone Patent Problems!)


– [Announcer] This video was brought to you by CuriosityStream. – And since you’re the one who screwed me, I’d say you owe me one. – Technically, he screwed his wife. (playful music) Hey legal eagles, it’s
time to think like lawyer. You asked for it so
more analysis of Suits. Today we are covering the second episode in the first season. I think I will keep going
with the first season, but if there are specific
episodes later on in the series that are especially
ripe for legal analysis, please let me know and
maybe I’ll jump ahead. As always, of course please subscribe and comment in the form of an objection, which I will either sustain or overrule. And of course stick around
until the end of this video where I give Suits episode
two a grade for legal realism. So without further ado, let’s dig in to the second episode of Suits. – Come on, what do you say,
we go five out of nine? – So you can keep abusing me? No thank you, I’m done. – Oh come on, ill spot you three. – Game time’s over, Wyatt, they’re here. – They’re here? – Get set up in the conference room. – Yeah, no I’ll just uh. – Get set up in the conference room. – I have never seen a law office that has a game room like
that, even in New York where law offices for big
firms can be pretty nice. They don’t really look
anything like the kind of Silicon Valley start-up
offices that you see often on TV, so this is not a particularly realistic depiction of
what a law firm looks like. – Wait, wait, wait, where
do you think you’re going? – Into the room with the people. – Wrong, that’s the adult table in there, and you haven’t earned the privilege yet. – But, I, I played air hockey with you. – You need to go back to the office and file a patent for the phone. – A patent, I don’t know
how to file a patent. – What? – Figure it out. – Can’t we do that after– – No. – So that would be crazy
to wait to file a patent for this technology that you’re
trying to get funding for. Effectively what’s happening here is that they’re going to publish the technology that they want these people to invest in before they have protected it. We are only about a minute
and a half into this episode and this is already
malpractice that would probably get these guys disbarred. On top of that, this
meeting is only gonna last a couple of hours and
it’s always a good idea to make sure your entire
legal team is up to date with all of the information
that’s going back and forth. So if this is a big investment deal, Mike should be in there to
learn the facts on the ground, and he should have filed his
patent months if not years ahead of this meeting, this is crazy. – Okay have you ever
filed a patent before? I just got back from
this meeting with Harvey and he wants me to file this patent, but I have no idea what
that paperwork looks like, so any help in this
arena would be really– – Isn’t Mike supposed to
be a genius of the law? Isn’t that why they hired him? He’s like the greatest
legal mind of his generation even though he doesn’t have a law degree? And yet he’s constantly
going back to his paralegal for information about the most
basic things that lawyers do? I sense some inconsistencies in this show and the writing so far. (tense music) – Mike Ross, allow me to
introduce the Bainbridge briefs. – Which stack? – All of them. – Wait a minute, are these all– – Still printing, yeah, I
give it about a half hour. – Oh, it’s six printers,
23 pages a minute, 30 minutes, that’s 4,140 pages. – Plus all of this, which means
the next time you negotiate a deal, I would suggest to
get your facts straight. – In reality, if you
have gone to the printer with all of your briefs,
all those briefs have been proofed probably a dozen
times by 10 different people in a big law firm like this. You would never go to the
trouble of printing out thousands and thousands
of pages of documents unless you were 100% certain
that all of those documents were ready to be filed with the court. But what is accurate here,
and is kind of amusing, is the way that they bind
all of these documents. It’s called Velo binding,
it’s those sort of plastic jaws that you open up,
you have a special machine that opens them up and then
you place the briefs in them and then you close them up on top of them. That is, for certain courts
exactly how you have to submit your briefs, it’s
a real pain in the butt. So at least that attention
to detail is fairly accurate. – Please tell me that you’ve filed the– – Patent, no, not yet. – I gave it to you yesterday. – Same time I gave you
my Bainbridge briefs, which you haven’t finished. – I was here all night and
I barely got through half. – I was on hold for
almost 11 minutes before I gave up on your patent,
so what’s your point? – All right, let’s talk a little bit about what it means to file a patent. The paperwork to file a patent
is not particularly complex. There are forms that you
can use, it’s not that hard. The problem is that filing for a patent is not just filing for a patent, it’s all the work that goes into filing for the patent before you do it. If there is prior art,
meaning that there is someone who filed a similar patent before yours, or that your idea has already
been taken somewhere else, then your patent will be invalid. So when you go to a law firm and ask them to file a patent on your behalf, you’re not just asking
them to file the actual, physical paperwork for the patent, what you’re asking them to do
is hundreds of hours of work where attorneys will
cull through the database that contains all of the
other prior applications, some of which have been denied, some of which have been approved, and they’re looking for similar things that might invalidate your own patent. And in fact, if you’re following politics, you might know that our
acting Attorney General, Matt Whitaker was involved with a company called World Wide Marketing,
which was an infamous patent scam that was known
for filing patents without doing the leg work to find
out if there was prior art. So a lot of people who paid
tens of thousands of dollars to this company in order
to get the patents approved found that their patents
were actually invalidated because this company wasn’t
doing a prior art search. So it’s crazy, number one,
that they haven’t filed a patent for this thing before
they’ve gone to investors, and number two, it’s crazy
that they think it’s just a simple matter of filing
for the patent itself when in fact it’s the hundreds
if not thousands of hours it takes for the leg work
before you file for that patent. – You wanted to see me? – Sit. I looked through your work
on the Bainbridge briefs. Spectacular. – It’s just proofing. How could proofing
something be spectacular? – Sup? – We just heard from Wyatt. We got a response from the patent office. – You got a response back
from the patent office a day after you filed your patent? That, uh, that does not happen. (chuckles) – And? – It’s been denied. – What? – Evidently there was a similar claim. – Wait, what do you mean,
somebody beat us to it? – No, someone beat you to it. You filed less than 24 hours ago, which means you filed a day
later than you said you would. – Oh my god, well yeah, that’s why you file for a
patent months if not years before you start getting
investments from outside people, that’s the problem with going to investors before you’ve gotten the patent. This whole episode is so stupid. – Okay, what’s gonna happen now? – I suggest you get on the
phone, call the patent office, and find out who beat us to it. Then you’re gonna have
Donna find any judge who will listen so we
can get an injunction and stop whoever it is from
launching their product first. – Okay. – An injunction on what grounds? It’s true that sometimes you can seek out the extraordinary relief
from a court, an injunction, which is basically a court
order to prevent someone from doing something or it
forces them to do something, but you have to have
legal grounds to do it. And the fact that someone filed a patent based on the information
that you provided to them is not grounds for an injunction
unless there was some sort of non-disclosure agreement
at the investors’ meeting, but that seems relatively unlikely. We’ll see, not a good legal tactic so far. – Hey, Harvey. Did you tell him it was me? – Why would I do that? I’m responsible for you, it was me. – Yeah, and that would be true whether Mike was actually an attorney or not, which he is not in this case. Harvey is the lead attorney, he’s the one that’s
signing papers most likely, and so it’s his neck on the line. Also, by the way, it was his decision not to file for a patent until
after he met with investors. That is malpractice, he’d get
totally disbarred for that. (tense music) – [Judge] Did you not
see the sign outside? – Just putting it away, your Honor. – It would already be in your pocket, but you are running late, so
perhaps that’s why it wasn’t. Let the record so that
council is fined $1,000 for failing to follow the
posted rules of the court. – Your Honor, I didn’t mean– – And for mouthing off. – Mouthing off? – Yeah, so that’s a bit
extreme, but I have seen judges throw attorneys out of their court room for cell phones whose ringers go off. I’ve never seen a judge
chastise council for just displaying a cell phone
that’s not making any noise, but if the rules of the court say that you can’t have a cell
phone in that courtroom, then you can’t have a cell
phone in that courtroom. The judge gets to decide what
goes on in his or her court, and there are plenty of
courts that don’t even let you take a cell phone
into the building itself, that is the case with a lot of the federal courthouses in Virginia and
Washington DC where I practice. So you really have to be
careful and know the rules of the court before you
head in to the courthouse. – Request denied.
(gavel bangs) Court adjourned for the morning. Better luck next time, Harvey. – From now on, I want him
when I go against you. (laughs) – [Woman] Your Honor, I have– – [Judge] Send them in. – Oh, no no no no no. You do not get to have a
private meeting with the judge without opposing council present. This is an ex parte communication,
this is totally improper. Even though the judge has
already denied this request, there might be an appeal, there might be other issues in this particular case. This is totally improper
to meet with one side and not the other, this
should never happen. – I could have you brought up on review for talking to me like that. – Then we can get it all on record. – Get what? – Whatever it is that you
seem to have against me for no apparent reason. I have a solid argument
for any reasonable judge to grant my injunction, so
solid it begs the question why do you have it in for me? And I don’t even know your first name. – Really, my wife never mentioned it? – Your wife? – The woman you had an
affair with last month? – Ah okay, so that is
what we call a classic conflict of interest. In California, what you
would do is file a 170.6, which is a request for the
judge to recuse themselves. There is no possible way that this judge gets to preside over this particular case when we has a huge bias problem. Now that Harvey knows this information, he absolutely should bring
this judge up on review. The damage has already been done, though, the judge has issued his ruling, so he can’t back out now. There it isn’t going to be a
good outcome for this judge, regardless of what unscrupulous conduct Harvey has engaged in
here, this is not good. (upbeat rock music) God, he’s terrible at tennis. ♪ Waving it around ♪ – They’re both terrible at tennis. – My earlier ruling wasn’t
clear enough for you? – Crystal, but I didn’t
want you suffer for it. You see, if you don’t sign my injunction, there’s gonna be a law suit. When the next judge sees all the facts, he’s gonna overturn your ruling. – You may be right, but by then your clients will have dumped you. – You may be right, but
that sterling reputation that you value so highly, down the tubes. – Oh boy, okay, so this
is called blackmail. This is incredibly
unethical, not to mention this is yet another ex
parte communication, which is totally improper. Man, I mean, at this point
Harvey’s gonna get disbarred, the judge might be disbarred
and removed from the bench if this ever comes to light. This is violating your
oath as an attorney. – You filing for divorce? – Soon enough. Perhaps we could discuss a
little quid pro quo before I do. – I’m listening. – You sign a document that
says you slept with my wife, I’ll give you your injunction. – And why would you want me to do that? – To prevent her from taking me for half of everything I own. – So what you’re saying is
you’d like to blackmail me. – [Judge] I’m saying
we could both benefit. – You’re blackmailing each other. He just came in there and
tried to blackmail the judge into giving him a verdict that he wanted, and now the judge is trying
to blackmail him right back. I mean, these two deserve each other. – And since you’re the one who screwed me, I’d say you owe me one. – Technically, he screwed his wife. – And he did the snapping
thing and Gregory– – Look at me. (clears throat) You’re high. Get out. – Oh that is not a good sign. – Look, this is not my fault, all right, Louis made me do it. – Louis did, right, he
put a gun to your head, made you smoke pot. – Yeah he did, he pulled
out the drug test, which I failed by the way, and then he told me that
if I didn’t smoke pot to help him land this new
client, that he’d fire me. It’s not so different that asking someone out for drinks, is it? – You and I had a deal. – I’m sorry. – [Harvey] And if next time,
Louis asks you to do something that I told you not to do, what then? – [Mike] I told you that
I did not have a choice. – Oh, because he had a gun to your head. – [Mike] Yes. – And what are your choices if someone puts a gun to your head? – What are you talking about? You do what they say or they shoot you. – Wrong, you take the gun
or you pull out a bigger one or you call their bluff, or you do any one of 146 other things. – This is a really interesting situation. I think that Louis might be liable for conspiracy to engage in
illegal drug consumption. Obviously Mike is guilty of having consumed an illicit substance, in New York it’s still
illegal to consume marijuana, but he was induced to do so by Louis, they engaged in an agreement
for him to engage in this particular action for the gain
of both of those individuals. So I think that given that
there is an agreement, there is an overt act to further the ends of the conspiracy here,
I think Louis may in fact also be guilty of the object
of the conspiracy itself, so Louis is as culpable as Mike for engaging in smoking marijuana. Interesting legal situation. – Do you know how long it was before I got to sit at the adult table? It was when I brought in my first client, which I don’t recall you having done. And when you screwed up that patent and Wyatt went apeshit on
me, I didn’t put that on you, I took it on myself. – I mean, you both royally
screwed up that patent, that’s not just Mike. – [Woman] Louis told me
what you did at the club. – [Mike] I bet he didn’t
tell you the whole story. – Told me enough to impress me. – He landed the client. – New business is hard. People will promise you the world, but until they sign that
engagement letter, means nothing. I don’t know what you told Tom Keller, but bringing a client in at your age, that reminds me of Harvey. – That’s true, it is very
unusual for junior associates to bring in new clients,
especially potentially a summer associate like
Mike, it’s unclear to me whether he’s a summer associate
or a junior associate. He was interviewed as a summer associate, which is like an internship,
but he is acting like a junior associate, writers
didn’t quite get that one right. At any rate, it is incredibly
unusual for a first year junior associate to bring
in a client of any kind, and that is the way that you get promoted, you know, almost immediately. – What are you showing
us, is this a website? – Available at the Suntech domain name. – All the design plans and
calculations have been uploaded. – Is this online now? – It can be. – Which means the whole world will have access to my designs. – They’ll be 10 knock-offs of that phone before you can catch a cab
back to your headquarters. – We could file an injunction. – Not before tomorrow, and
once that technology is out there, good luck putting that
genie back in the bottle. – Well then we’ll sue. – But my client won’t have any money. What he will have is credit
for the initial design, which after he incorporates
under a different name, will be worth a hell of a lot more money than the $20 million that you’re offering. – Yeah, except that if the
other side’s patent is valid, then they can sue anyone
who uses those designs and builds the prototype
without their permission. That’s the point of the patent protection. And they would probably be
able to sue this poor gentleman out of existence for a
whole raft of things, including intentional
interference with contract, disclosure of trade secrets, and still at the end of the day, these nefarious guys on the other side still have their patent
because Harvey and Mike didn’t file their patent
when they should have. So um, yeah, this is probably yet another malpractice and disbarment trap. – What is this? – It’s a copy of the
judicial conduct codes. Friend of mine who works at
the Attorney General’s office gave it to me, we had
a nice chat about you. I told him if you were willing
to blackmail someone once, chances are you’ve done it before. He’s very anxious to meet you. – You think you can get
away with screwing my wife and then have me investigated? – You actually have it
the wrong way around. The only thing I’ve done so far is have you investigated. – What? – I never actually slept with Lauren, but I knew you’d never believe
me so I kept my mouth shut. But now that she’s getting a divorce, my policy no longer
applies, and of course, she’s free to date whoever she pleases. And she pleases me. Enjoy your evening, Donald. – No honor among thieves. The judge should have gotten
him to sign an affidavit at the same time that he issued his ruling if he really was gonna follow through with the blackmail here. That was just poor lawyering
on the judge’s part. (playful music) All right, so now it’s time
to give Suits episode two a grade for legal realism. (gavel bangs) There was some accurate discussion of what it takes to file for a patent, but also a complete disregard
for all of the leg work that goes into it, and of course, all of the attorneys in this episode would have been disbarred
many, many times over. Last time around, I gave Suits a B-. I’m afraid this episode is
slightly less realistic, so I’m going to have to
downgrade it to a C+. Suits is not exactly the most
realistic show out there, Harvey and Mike seem to
know nothing about the law, but if you’re looking for
the best documentaries and non-fiction movies that exist, you need to check out CuriosityStream. For example, I’m watching
David Starkey’s documentary on the Magna Carta, which explains how the 1215 charter made everyone
subject to the rule of law and became the foundation
of the US Constitution. It’s the same rule of
law that Mike and Harvey disregard every single episode. Legal Eagles get a free
account for 30 days by clicking the link below or using the promo code LegalEagle. So a few days on
CuriosityStream and you’ll know more about the law than
Harvey and Mike put together. So check out the link
below, start learning about the real world, not the
fictional world of Suits, and until next time,
I’ll see you in court.

20 thoughts on “Real Lawyer Reacts to Suits (Episode 2 – Cell Phone Patent Problems!)”

  1. OBJECTION: 6:32 , it's a tv show, what do you expect? they have to wait for it longer in order to show the rest of the story? nahh

  2. OBJECTION:
    1. It's not Pearson Hardmans law office that looks like that. They are out at the people who made the technology. And as you can see in the episode the person that made the design is very childish. But he has a lot of money and therefore they have a "playroom"
    2. Mike ross is smart. But he never went to law school. Therefore even though he knows all the laws he doesn't know how to fíll out a simple (if you are a lawyer) patent.
    Please do another video like this. I really love this.
    I also have some questions. Would you recommend people to be lawyers? What's the downside and what to expect?

  3. Hey legal eagle…if I may suggest…u should make a review video on suits, season 1 episode 12….it deals with the case of juvinile murder and wrongful accusation.
    Regards
    5th Year Law Students.

  4. Most of the stuff you sat is explained if you just watch the whole scene and they are aware of all the unethical and borderline illegal things they do it's not a plot hole

  5. OBJECTION: Harvey’s plan to release all of the documents that pertain to the patent would be successful. The release of those documents would spur hundreds of knockoffs, it is not possible for them to sue each and every one of them in defence of their patent. The precedence is the patent infringement of Rollin White’s “bored-through cylinder” which when bought by smith and Wesson revolutionised revolver technology. However in their purchase of his patent he was tasked with defending it from all future infringement, he was bankrupt by this endeavour and infringement continued regardless

  6. objection how about the latest season where the lady from the bar comes and takes over the law firm because they think they aren't ethical

  7. It is just a tv show not a legal documentary. I know that these people would get disbarred in the real world. In real world, none of this would have happened. It is just a tv show with an interesting plot. People who watch it don't care whether there is legal accuracy or not. I am a law graduate so I know that you make valid points but this is the point of the plot. These lawyers are shady. Harvey was doing shady things his entire career and he cares only about winning. Mike not going to Harvard Law and becoming a fraud was the point of the plot.

  8. I have a question, do lawyers lend out a phone for a client for them to be able to maybe log in on social media or call their mother or something like that?

  9. Yeah, patent research is about 1000 hours. That is 41 days of 24 hours a day work. This work is usually done by the Business Advisory Group (the bag men). Whose purpose is to inflate billable hours.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *