Thanks for the PM biggreydog. The info you provided to me was an interesting read for sure. The theme I got from it however was that firms would not knowingly represent both sides in a patent case but that if at some point after representation began they discovered a conflict of interest, they would work to resolve the matter.

These excerpts from the info you sent say it all:

"We will not knowingly undertake litigation that is directly against you while currently representing you."

"If we discover a conflict after work has begun, you will use reasonable efforts to help us resolve the conflict to the mutual satisfaction of both clients. Reasonable efforts include allowing us to create an ethical or virtual wall between groups of attorneys in our firm to protect confidential information of both clients, whenever we determine that such an ethical or virtual wall will safeguard the confidential information of each client."

This language in an agreement makes sense to me as mistakes happen and conflicts can arise during litigation. Knowingly accepting a case that has the same firm representing both sides in a lawsuit does not make sense to me and I can't even imagine the court allowing it.

Wasn't it sunpoop who said RP told him DM would eventually opt out due to conflicts of interest?