In Sperry v. Florida, 373 U.S. 379, 83 S. Ct. 1322, 10 L. Ed. 2d 428, 1963 Dec. Comm'r Pat. 211 (1963), the Court held that a practitioner registered to practice before the United States Patent Office, but not licensed to practice law by any state, should not have been enjoined from engaging in his patent practice from Florida. Id. at 381, 404. Relying on federal supremacy, see id. at 383-85, the Court explained that "the State maintains control over the practice of law within its borders except to the limited extent necessary for the accomplishment of the federal objectives [of the United States Patent Office]" and that "it is entirely reasonable for a practitioner to hold himself out as qualified to perform his specialized work, so long as he does not misrepresent the scope of his license." Id. at 402 & n.47.