Edward S. Cheng quoted in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly on Hsuanyeh Law Group, PC v. Winston & Strawn LLP

January 16, 2024

Edward S. Cheng, partner in the firm’s Litigation Department, was quoted in the January 15th issue of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. The article, “Lawyers weigh strength of copyright suit filed against BigLaw firm,” discusses Hsuanyeh Law Group, PC v. Winston & Strawn LLP. In this case, Hsuanyeh Legal Group filed a federal suit accusing attorneys at Winston & Strawn of copying “nearly verbatim” a motion to dismiss that the plaintiff filed on behalf of a client in a consolidated patent infringement action. In the article, Ed and other lawyers weighed in on the strength of the copyright infringement action against Winston & Strawn.

Read the full article from Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (subscriber content).

From the article:

Professional liability lawyer Edward S. Cheng said he does not see HLG v. Winston & Strawn as marking the start of a trend.

For one, the Boston lawyer said, the predicament faced by Winston & Strawn can be easily avoided by use of the tried and true “me too” motion. Cheng said it is common practice for litigators who see a particularly good discovery or dispositive motion filed by another party in a case to file a simple pleading seeking the same relief “for the same reasons” stated in the other party’s brief.

“That’s not hard to do,” Cheng said. “People do it all the time.”

On the other hand, Cheng said it is understandable that HLG would be exasperated by the alleged actions of Winston’s lawyers.

“It’s one thing to do a ‘me too’ motion; it’s an entirely different thing to take what someone else did and pass it off as your own,” Cheng said.

Professional liability attorney Cheng said he can see ethics issues arising from potential violations of Rule 11, which under the state and federal rules of civil procedure govern the signing of pleadings.

“When you sign a pleading, under Rule 11 you are making a representation to the court that it’s your work because you are vouching for the facts and the law in what you have just filed,” Cheng said. “And under Rule 3.3 of the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct, you have to be candid toward the tribunal.”