On May 4, 2012, in Minkin v. Gibbons, P.C., the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit asserted jurisdiction over a patent attorney malpractice case (No. 2011-1178 (Fed. Cir. May 4, 2012)). In this case, the plaintiff inventor alleged that his patent attorneys negligently drafted his patent claims so narrowly that they failed to prevent competitors from developing similar products that circumvented the limitations.

Attorney malpractice is a state law cause of action that is generally brought in state court. However, under Title 28, Section 1338(a) of the US Code, federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over a malpractice case involving a substantial question of federal patent law. The Federal Circuit held that it had jurisdiction based on its own precedent finding jurisdiction where a plaintiff had to establish that, but for his patent attorney's negligence, the scope of the patent claims would have been sufficient to prevent competitors from easily avoiding them.