Case Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Lech

Citation: 2017-Ohio-4131

Docket Number: 

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2017-06-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Lech, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2017-Ohio-4131.] 
 
 
 
DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. LECH. 
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Lech, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2017-Ohio-4131.] 
(No. 2017-0359—Submitted June 2, 2017—Decided June 6, 2017.) 
ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. 
____________________ 
{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an 
application for reinstatement by respondent, Robert Raymond Lech, Attorney 
Registration No. 0073078, last known business address in Dublin, Ohio. 
{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of May 10, 2017, 
wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(20)(B), suspended respondent from 
the practice of law for a period of 90 days, to run concurrent with the suspension 
imposed by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), and 
ordered that respondent would not be reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio 
until he is reinstated to the practice of law by the USPTO, finds that respondent 
has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. 
V(24). 
{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to 
the practice of law in the State of Ohio.  It is further ordered that respondent shall 
serve two years of probation and that respondent’s probation will be satisfied by 
his compliance with the probation imposed by the USPTO. 
{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies 
of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(1) and that publication be 
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(2). 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, FRENCH, O’NEILL, FISCHER, 
and DEWINE, JJ., concur. 
________________________