Search for: "Quillen v. Quillen" Results 1 - 20 of 29
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Mar 2007, 7:45 am
In preparing a more detailed paper on errors in Innovation and Its Discontents (Jaffe and Lerner, Princeton University Press, 2004), I revisited the brief of eBay in the eBay v. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 12:38 pm
Separately, Judge Moore discussed a comparison of Quillen/Webster v. [read post]
4 Apr 2008, 5:45 am
[On a less disguised Lemley flip-flop, recall Lemley switches sides in KSR v. [read post]
25 Sep 2009, 12:01 pm
A note to Quillen and Webster from the CAFC in KARA TECHNOLOGY v. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 7:21 pm
J. 875 (2007), which is generally about KSR v. [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 8:16 am
If one looks at the second paper of Quillen and Webster (wherein the 97% grant figure is "qualified", 12 Fed. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 5:13 am by Michael Risch
  This differs from the methodology of Cotropia, Quillen & Webster, who cannot trace each application, but can merely count them up from reports for a given year.The differences between the studies are not that important for the key measure of that study - how many patent applications are there? [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 7:00 pm
" IPBiz notes a similar strategy of proof by sound byte was used in KSR v. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 11:25 pm
[But of Lemley/Moore and the rules, see Comments on continuation practice proposal appearing in the Federal Register (Jan. 2006) ] See also Law Review on continuation application issue Ta-tah to Quillen/Webster/Lemley? [read post]