Grounding Netflix's 'Death By Lightning' In Patent History

In this article for Law360, Tasha Gerasimow, with co-author David Gerasimow, assesses the Netflix miniseries "Death by Lightning" and the antagonist's comments about the patent system.

The historical miniseries "Death by Lightning," released on Netflix in November, chronicles the presidency of James A. Garfield, the 20th U.S. president, and the 1881 assassination by delusional admirer Charles J. Guiteau that cut it to mere months.

The series explores themes of political extremism, mental health and government corruption in the Gilded Age and provides a detailed, if not intimate, portrayal of a president - and that of his assassin, too. It also makes, curiously, repeated reference to the patent system.

This show thus offers a rare opportunity for patent practitioners and general viewers alike to consider the patent system in a unique historical context while enjoying a first-rate drama.

Early in the first episode, Frances Scoville, the sister of disgruntled office seeker and future assassin Charles Guiteau, encourages him to pursue employment with what is now the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Guiteau held an Illinois law license after all, and his sister's husband was a patent attorney who might have been able to facilitate a connection, particularly as a patron favor in the Gilded Age.

Yet, sharply declining his sister's suggestion, the fictionalized Guiteau retorts, "Patent law is a business for those who lack their own ideas." So begins Netflix's electrifying treatment of a now-obscure topic in American history: the assassination of Garfield in 1881.

But is Guiteau right? Is patent law a business for those who lack their own ideas? Was that true in the 1880s? And is that true now?

Our review of the evidence in this case shows that, like most of Guiteau's ideas, this one is patently false.

But Guiteau's comments are not without context, and they may not have been shocking at the time. The formal examination of patent applications was first adopted in 1836. When Garfield was elected to office in 1880, the Patent Office had just issued its 223,211th patent.

By the latter half of the 19th century, as now, the public and its elected officials pondered the pace and produce of innovation in the future. Indeed, by 1899, then-Commissioner of the Patent Office Charles H. Duell was alleged to have suggested that the Patent Office shut down - not because of a failure to fund the government, but because "everything that can be invented has been invented." While likely apocryphal, the story nonetheless underscores a school of thought prevalent at the time.

Luckily, numerous innovators who also practiced patent law were not limited by the fictionalized Guiteau's sentiments. Indeed, there are a plethora of notable examples evidencing patent law practitioners who were not only innovators but some of the world's leading contributors.

This is further noteworthy in light of the fact that patent examiners are hamstrung for periods of time from applying for a patent or acquiring any interest in a patent during their employment at the Patent Office. Specifically, Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 4, explicitly bars current and recent Patent Office employees from applying for patents.

The rule even states that any patents applied for thereafter shall not be entitled to any priority date earlier than one year after the termination of the employee's appointment. This exists to prevent conflict of interest, as patent examiners are not supposed to have a personal incentive to block or delay other applications. A patent prosecution bar could surely act to deter those interested in seeking patent protection for their ideas.

Many examples disprove the fictionalized Guiteau's hasty remarks. A clear instance is the famous Albert Einstein, who served as a patent examiner for seven years at the Swiss patent office.

Far from seeing the patent office as a place without innovation, Einstein described it as a "worldly cloister where I hatched my most beautiful ideas." After working for the office, he obtained several patents in at least seven countries. Einstein, despite being "just" a patent examiner, is of course credited with having conceived of the theory of general relativity - the mathematical concept, however, being directed to patent-ineligible subject matter.

Of course, Einstein followed Garfield, so Guiteau could be forgiven for not knowing of such an example. But what of the example of Alfred Ely Beach (1826-1896), the father of New York City's subway system? An inventor and attorney, Beach was awarded patents for improvements to the typewriter, a cable traction railway system, and a pneumatic transit system for mail and passengers.

Beach also co-owned and edited Scientific American, the influential science and technology magazine. Importantly, some attribute significant growth in U.S. patent activity to the magazine's announcement that it would help secure patents for American inventors. There was a large increase in the number of patent applications received between 1846 and 1886, and the number of patents issued annually rose from approximately 600 patents issued in 1846 to more than 20,000 patents issued in 1886.

Numerous other inventors-attorneys followed Beach. For example, Chester Carlson (1906-1968), the inventor of xerography, was also a patent attorney. He allegedly developed the first working photocopier in the 1930s while working in the patent field, having personally experienced the tedious process of manually copying patent documents.

A modern example of a successful patent law specialist and inventor is Joel S. Douglas, who pioneered the first alternate-site glucose meter used to treat diabetes patients in the 1990s. He continues to invent to this day, currently holds over 100 patents and has built and exited multiple million-dollar companies, demonstrating success in both invention and patent law practice.

So, Netflix's version of Guiteau was wrong in stating that patent lawyers lack their own ideas. Yet, the treatment of innovation in "Death by Lightning" strikes more than once. It keeps its audience captivated by featuring one of the world's most famous inventors and patent owners: Alexander Graham Bell and his real-life attempts to save Garfield after being shot by Guiteau.

As Garfield lay dying, Bell hurriedly invented a crude metal detector in an unsuccessful attempt to locate the fatal slug. Although Bell did not obtain a patent for this device, based on our searches, Bell's novel "induction balance" was the first working metal detector and served as the basis for future devices.

Our review of the real-life trial transcripts in Guiteau's assassination trial reveals what Guiteau actually may have thought about the business of patent law.

First, Guiteau's legal defense in the assassination trial of Garfield was led, at least initially, by his brother-in-law George Scoville, the previously mentioned Illinois patent attorney.

Second, one witness at his trial, who previously worked with Guiteau, testified that Guiteau claimed to have obtained a patent "for the use of rouge by jewelers." The invention, as disclosed by Guiteau, was said to have been no more novel than "a patent directed to the application of bread to butter." While our searches fail to identify Guiteau as an inventor of any such rouge patent, perhaps Guiteau was a man ahead of his time - as U.S. Patent No. 1,501,727, "Machine for Spreading Bread with Butter or the Like," was issued decades later in 1922.

Third, also during trial, the prosecutor's questions suggest the existence of writings in which Guiteau had potentially expressed admiration for the Patent Office. Specifically, the prosecutor asked whether Guiteau bought the murder weapon with the ivory handle, instead of the plain wooden handle, because he believed the gun would have historical significance and would look good in the Patent Office, where he believed it would be displayed as a macabre artifact of history.[1]

According to the trial transcripts, the real-life Guiteau, consistent with his fictionalized counterpart's portrayed disdain of patent law, denied ever saying or writing that the Patent Office would have been a befitting place for such an item. The U.S. State Department would have been better, he is said to have retorted.

So, "Death by Lightning" seems to have accurately portrayed Guiteau's real-life sentiments about, if not obsessions with, the Patent Office. But to be clear, Guiteau himself was wrong about working at the Patent Office: The office has long been a home for innovation and innovative people, including examiners who leave the office and go onto great discovery and innovation.

Moreover, then and now, patent law creates strong incentives for investments in research and development. The U.S. has issued 12 million patents since the time of Garfield and Guiteau, and it seems that even in 2025 much remains to be invented, discovered and innovated upon. While Guiteau's patent delusions may have affected the course of historical events, the Patent Office's role in innovation cannot be denied.


Tasha Gerasimow, Ph.D., is a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP.

David Gerasimow is the founder at Gerasimow Law PC.

The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of their employer, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

[1] As a reminder, by the 1850s, the Patent Office was a major tourist attraction known as a "museum of curiosities" with items such as the original Declaration of Independence and a piece of Plymouth Rock displayed.