Would this be considered legal advice in Texas?

[eathmichael]

I need to get an objective view on what constitutes legal advice.

If a technical expert were sent a reference to patent (from someone inside his company), and wrote the note below and sent it back to the person who asked (again, inside his company), copying the legal department, would you consider the note below as expressing a legal opinion?


As a communication expert, it is obvious to me that one would want to impedance match elements of ANY communication system. One of my main concerns since joining the project 17 months ago was making sure that we took steps to accurately measure the characteristic impedance of any couplers, econnects, or any other parts of the system, and either modify them to match the cables, or engineer the cables to match the characteristic impedance other communication components. I have made the point many times that impedance matching was just as important, if not more important, than the signal transfer function or loss from the coupler, and that characteristic impedance should receive an equal amount of scrutiny and testing.

In addition, we have also done a considerable amount of work to model the magnetic flux of the couplers, to minimize lost flux or leakage. Again, this is something ANY communication system would want to do.

Although from a technical standpoint, much of what this patent discloses is obvious, it does not necessarily mean it meets the legal definition of obvious. This is something the legal team will have to analyze and determine.

In addition, we will need to analyze the claims to see whether we want to do anything that is actually claimed in this patent.


I greatly appreciate your view on this.

[HomeGuru]

Originally Posted by eathmichael

I need to get an objective view on what constitutes legal advice.

If a technical expert were sent a reference to patent (from someone inside his company), and wrote the note below and sent it back to the person who asked (again, inside his company), copying the legal department, would you consider the note below as expressing a legal opinion?


As a communication expert, it is obvious to me that one would want to impedance match elements of ANY communication system. One of my main concerns since joining the project 17 months ago was making sure that we took steps to accurately measure the characteristic impedance of any couplers, econnects, or any other parts of the system, and either modify them to match the cables, or engineer the cables to match the characteristic impedance other communication components. I have made the point many times that impedance matching was just as important, if not more important, than the signal transfer function or loss from the coupler, and that characteristic impedance should receive an equal amount of scrutiny and testing.

In addition, we have also done a considerable amount of work to model the magnetic flux of the couplers, to minimize lost flux or leakage. Again, this is something ANY communication system would want to do.

Although from a technical standpoint, much of what this patent discloses is obvious, it does not necessarily mean it meets the legal definition of obvious. This is something the legal team will have to analyze and determine.

In addition, we will need to analyze the claims to see whether we want to do anything that is actually claimed in this patent.


I greatly appreciate your view on this.

**A: I would deem such a technical opinion rather than a legal opinion.