Transparent shuffling of money and legal responsibilities don't have to be an effective shield if we follow the money.

Plus if you toss lawyer in jail and disbar them you will run out of lawyers to sac pretty quickly.

> In this scope they could bring in previous litigative history of the plaintiff (or any related entities, piercing the corporate veil).

Or alternatively you'd manage to take down all of microsoft's patents for that one time they thought a paper clip telling people what to do was innovative... Less jokingly, I'm sure microsoft has a dumb patent or two kicking around, that doesn't mean their entire suite is BS.

There's a difference between having a handful of dumb patents among a sea of valid ones v. having a portfolio composed entirely of dumb patents.

There's also a difference between sitting on a handful of dumb patents v. most or all of your patent litigation cases being over dumb patents.

There isn't a difference unless that's outlined in the law or it's interpretation and I don't know how you'd sanely define things to disallow abuse here.