Opinion
A19-0113
07-18-2019
IN RE Petition for DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST Michael Anietie ESSIEN, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 031741X.
ORDER
In a May 20, 2019 order, we suspended respondent Michael Anietie Essien for a minimum of 30 days, retroactive to October 16, 2018. In re Essien, 927 N.W.2d 747, 747 (Minn. 2019) (order). We imposed reciprocal discipline on Essien after the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) suspended him for 30 days. Id. We stated that Essien was "eligible for reinstatement" and that "[i]n order to be reinstated," Essien had to file "an affidavit establishing," among other things, that he had complied with Rule 26, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR). Id.
Essien filed an affidavit and a supplemental affidavit seeking reinstatement and showing his compliance with, among other things, Rule 26, RLPR. In these affidavits, Essien states that he is "not representing any Minnesota State Court clients as of the effective date of my suspension" and that "the only other jurisdiction that I am admitted to practice before is the" USPTO. He also states that he attached "[c]opies of the notices, names and addresses of the clients, courts and agencies to which notices were sent ... based on the retroactive suspension and the earlier sent mails."
The Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility (OLPR) filed an affidavit stating that it believes that Essien "has complied with the terms of the Court’s suspension order" and does not object to Essien’s reinstatement.
Rule 26, RLPR, requires suspended attorneys to give notice of their Minnesota suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals. In nonlitigation matters, the lawyer "shall notify each client being represented as of the date of ... the order imposing discipline ... in a pending matter ... of the lawyer’s ... suspension." Rule 26(a), RLPR (emphasis added). In litigation matters, the lawyer "shall notify each client, opposing counsel ... and the tribunal involved in pending litigation or administrative proceedings as of the date of ... the order imposing discipline ... of the lawyer’s ... suspension." Rule 26(b), RLPR (emphasis added). These notices "shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, within ten (10) days of the Court’s order. " Rule 26(c), RLPR (emphasis added).
Essien was required to give notice of his Minnesota suspension to all clients he represented as of the date of our suspension order and to opposing counsel and tribunals in any pending litigation matter he had as of the date of our suspension order. Rule 26(a)-(b), RLPR. Our suspension order was dated May 20, 2019. These notices had to be sent by May 30, 2019. Rule 26(c), RLPR.
Essien has not established that he complied with Rule 26, RLPR. While Essien stated that he was "not representing clients in Minnesota state courts as of the effective date of [his] suspension," his suspension was retroactively effective as of October 16, 2018. It is not clear whether Essien had any Minnesota state court clients as of May 20, 2019. Essien did not state that he had no patent or trademark clients as of May 20, 2019. In addition, all of the client notices that Essien attached to his affidavits are dated October 8, 2018, with certified mailing dates of November 15, 2018, and refer only to his suspension by the USPTO.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the request of respondent Michael Anietie Essien to be reinstated is denied, without prejudice, and that Essien may file an additional affidavit with the Clerk of the Appellate Courts demonstrating that he has complied with Rule 26, RLPR.