Side Business Draws Suspension
An agreed-upon one year suspension has been approved and adopted by the Wisconsin Supreme Court
At the time of the events giving rise to this matter, Attorney Rosin was a lawyer at an intellectual property law firm located in Illinois (hereafter, “the firm”). The terms of Attorney Rosin’s employment at the firm required him to provide and bill all legal and patent-related services through the firm.
On May 3, 2021, Attorney Rosin formed a Wisconsin limited liability company dedicated to providing patent law services (hereafter, “the Wisconsin LLC”). He did not inform anyone at the firm that he had formed the Wisconsin LLC. Attorney Rosin understood that forming the Wisconsin LLC violated the terms of his employment with the firm.
On approximately May 6, 2021, Attorney Rosin solicited one of the firm’s clients, C.G.J., to become a client of the Wisconsin LLC. On May 10, 2021, C.G.J. hired Attorney Rosin to perform patent-related services through the Wisconsin LLC. Attorney Rosin did not advise C.G.J. to terminate the firm’s representation of him, or tell anyone at the firm that he was providing services to C.G.J. outside of the firm.
Attorney Rosin provided patent-related services to C.G.J. through the Wisconsin LLC between May 10, 2021 and November 2021. C.G.J. paid the Wisconsin LLC $82,501 for those services. Attorney Rosin did not report or remit any of the fees to the firm upon their receipt.
In addition, on October 21, 2021, Attorney Rosin spoke with a representative of a company that was not a client of the firm. Attorney Rosin proposed that the company hire the Wisconsin LLC to provide intellectual property and/or patent-related services, and he sent the company a proposed engagement letter for hiring the Wisconsin LLC. The company chose not to retain the Wisconsin LLC’s services.
The Illinois firm got wind of the conduct
On December 2 and 3, 2021, Attorney Rosin provided the founding partners of the firm with records showing the work he had done through the Wisconsin LLC while employed by the firm. On December 3, 2021, Attorney Rosin sent the firm a check for $36,914.80, which represented what the firm would have collected under Attorney Rosin’s compensation formula if the work he had performed and billed through the Wisconsin LLC had been performed and billed through the firm.
The court noted comparble prior cases
The stipulated one-year suspension of Attorney Rosin’s law license fits comfortably within this precedent. We note, too, that according to the OLR’s memorandum in support of the stipulation, Attorney Rosin has been subjected to other sanctions for his misconduct: The Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) entered into a settlement agreement with Attorney Rosin related to the same misconduct whereby the USPTO publicly reprimanded Attorney Rosin, ordered him to serve a two-year probationary period, and ordered him to complete four hours of continuing legal education primarily concerning ethics, fiduciary duty, or a lawyer’s duty of candor. If Attorney Rosin fails to comply with the terms of the agreement or any of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct during his two-year probationary period, he faces a six-month suspension of his license to practice before the USPTO. We are satisfied that, under the totality of the circumstances presented, this court’s imposition of the stipulated one-year suspension of Attorney Rosin’s Wisconsin law license will be sufficient to accomplish the objectives of the lawyer disciplinary system.
(Mike Frisch)