Search for: "T. QUILLEN"
Results 41 - 60
of 93
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2009, 2:11 am
It wasn't true then, and now that the grant rate is below 50%, is something The Economist should fact-check before it expounds urban legends. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 1:06 am
This discussion began with papers of Quillen and Webster that suggested that the grant rate might be as high as 97% and more reasonably is at least 85%. [read post]
20 Jun 2009, 11:37 pm
[Remember Quillen and Webster's 97% patent grant rate?] [read post]
27 May 2009, 2:26 pm
Lemley/Moore in "Ending Abuse" said Quillen's grant numbers were preferred over Clarke's and then in "Rubber Stamp" that point was treated as "gone. [read post]
25 May 2009, 10:36 pm
Of course, Quillen said Europe had higher quality patents than did the US. [read post]
22 May 2009, 11:49 pm
For all Quillen's squawking about bad searches by the USPTO, and low quality patents, the USPTO did a lot better than the New York Times. [read post]
13 May 2009, 1:56 pm
In the year 2009, LBE still hasn't received a response. [read post]
3 May 2009, 3:19 pm
"You should not grant a monopoly to people who don't produce," said Grove, 72. [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 1:36 am
Qin Shi does talk about Quillen. [read post]
11 Apr 2009, 2:17 am
Comment on Patently-O:You can't blame the economic downturn for the entire drop in filings. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 1:51 am
Separately, as noted previously on IPBiz, the 2008 Emory "Rubber Stamp" didn't cite Quillen/Webster's THIRD paper (published in 2006) or commentary thereon, published in JPTOS in 2006. [read post]
28 Mar 2009, 4:40 pm
The PTO reports that the rate historically has been about 66%, n17 and that the rate now is only 54%, n18 but their estimate doesn't account for continuations. [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 9:16 pm
The Quillen/Webster approach was accepted by Lemley, until he wrote "The Patent Office is Not a Rubber-Stamp," dumping Quillen/Webster sub silentio. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 11:39 pm
Quillen, 671 N.E.2d 98, 100 (Ind. 1996)). [read post]
14 Nov 2008, 2:16 pm
**IPBiz notes that Lemley --> reversed himself on the Quillen/Webster vs. [read post]
23 Sep 2008, 9:10 pm
Beard, and Quillen/Webster in a 22 Sept. 08 post titled: The 'Wearing Down Examiners' Fallacy. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 3:16 pm
Quillen, Jr. [read post]
20 Jul 2008, 10:51 am
Quillen and Webster had been wrong all along. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 11:59 am
" Patent quality, and the (fantasy) high grant rate of Quillen and Webster were merely props to get to patent damages. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 6:01 pm
Kepplinger noted that "you can't make a mistake if you don't allow"); and5. [read post]
