Hot Psilocybin Patent Garbage: Keep it Burnin'
A short update on a 2022 classic
Friends. Enemies. Frenemies. Big news.
I’ve officially made it.
Ten years into my working career, I’ve done some pretty rad stuff. For example:
Early in my legal career, I self-developed a pixel perfect called DkT, to help lawyers access federal court pleadings on mobile devices and released the code open-source and the app for free.
As a younger associate, I found two items of case changing evidence on the eve of a patent trial that propelled a good former client to victory and got us a verdict jury invalidating four patents.
With Shane and Sue Sisley, I helped dismantle the NIDA monopoly.
Along the way, I’ve also been quoted in Rolling Stone, won an accolade or two, spoken at SXSW, argued a few federal appeals, and made partner six months ago. More recently, I’m branching out too, doing some podcasts and writing some op-eds. Not too shabby.
But what just happened days ago may surpass all of this. Combined.
Coda
Recall, my essay “Hot Psilocybin Patent Garbage” briefly discusses Information Disclosure Statements and the duty to disclose material information. Well, it turns out, the applicants in the NYU Application had some other items to disclose…
.
.
.
.
.
.
The other two articles there? Those are discussed in the piece (2017 Ross and 2017 Ross 2). Pictures of a red zero balloon and Martin Shkreli is now forever a government record and part of the file history for the NYU Application.1 I made it.
Your move patent examiner.
To be clear, I applaud the disclosure, which required some courage. Of course, if the patent now issues, it means the examiner my article and found it unpersuasive. Let’s see what happens.