Expert Witness Blog

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he writes on working with copies:

The best evidence for examination purposes is always the original document, but frequently only a photocopy is available. If it is necessary to examine a photocopy, the best copy for examination purposes is one made from the original document and not a copy of a copy.

Photocopies typically do not reveal all the evidence found on the original document or document being copied, i.e., significant quality and features of the writing, indentations, outlines, feather strokes, pen stops, alterations, etc. A photocopy can also contain artifacts not on the original. These artifacts may be dirt, dried white-out, or scratches on the glass. There may also be defects on the machine’s drum, or some other cause.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Fourth, the MOI should stand on its own for judgment. Some inventors include a section on the planned experiments to help define the invention. This often leads to the memo receiving a low rating and held for the next patent committee meeting. The MOI should be written when there is sufficient data or the concept is sufficiently complete for an evaluation.

At most companies, a highly rated MOI has been carefully “lobbied” by the inventor.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Now, a few things that should not be in the MOI.

First, the potential inventor should not express legal opinions concerning the potential invention. Attorneys are superb at sternly warning that such opinions can come back to haunt the inventor at a deposition or, more traumatically, on the witness stand.

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he answers the question:

What is known, sample, or specimen writing?

Regardless of what it is called, this is the known and verifiable writing of an individual that is to be compared to the questioned writing to try and determine whether the writer of the known wrote the questioned writing. Known writing falls into one of the following categories:

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Third, the MOI should include a reasonable summary of the prior art. This gives the reviewers a warm feeling that the writer of the memo has some reasonable appreciation concerning the novelty of the invention. In many cases, the inventor knows the prior art quite well. Some arguments why the MOI isn’t obvious in light of the prior art can be very helpful to a patent committee.

Fourth, the memo should have the correct administrative details such as references to lab books and the names of the inventors. Including a colleague who did not contribute to the invention raises a flag indicating possible future problems and undermines the credibility of the MOI as a legal document. An easy reason to lower the priority; someone will need to straighten out the inventors.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

There are some criteria for high-quality MOIs’.

First, is this something of current or potentially future business interest to the company?

Document examination expert witness Ronald N. Morris is a certified forensic document examiner and in this excerpt from Submitting a Handwriting Case for Examination, he answers the question:

What is questioned writing?

A questioned writing is any writing written by an unknown writer whose identity must be determined. The questioned writing may consist of a single or multiple signatures, numerals, cursive, or hand printing in the form of letters, forms, etc.

Chemistry expert witness Edward Funk, Ph. D., presented this short course to senior level chemical engineers on patents:

Scientists and engineers are taught to maintain laboratory notebooks as an important first step in the invention process. They know, but often don’t follow carefully, the rules of including a reasonable description of an experiment and the data, an idea with a diagram, or a possible new process or device. The lab book usually has some coffee stains that give some authenticity. The book is signed by a colleague who usually signs about 100 pages with a single date. More on this later, but this is the beginning, even if somewhat flawed, beginning of the invention process.

At a certain point, the scientist may decide to submit a “memo of invention” (MOI). This is the basic request to have a patent application filed. The form of this is quite different from company to company but the purpose is the same. Most companies have a patent committee of technical people, and at times a patent attorney and business people, who rate the MOI’s. Typically the rating is 1 to 5, with 5 being for important cases for immediate attention. The rating of 1 usually means “no interest to the company”-release to the inventor. Some MOIs are not rated for various political or technical reasons, and are held for review at the next meeting.