Search for: "Quillen v. Quillen" Results 1 - 20 of 29
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
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]
9 Dec 2014, 9:52 am by Dennis Crouch
The brief was filed by Howard Shipley of the Foley firm along with his partner George Quillen. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 9:49 pm by Marie Louise
’ – new study suggests that they aren’t (271 Patent Blog) Here we go again – Cecil Quillen Jr’s NYT letter to the editor re RCEs (Inventive Step) Patent secrecy orders increase (Maryland Intellectual Property Law Blog) US Patents – Decisions Northern District of Ohio: Qui Tam provision found unconstitutional: Unique Product Solutions Ltd. 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]
25 Sep 2009, 12:01 pm
A note to Quillen and Webster from the CAFC in KARA TECHNOLOGY v. [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]
14 Nov 2008, 2:16 pm
Gene Quinn notes that oral argument in USPTO 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]
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]
1 Aug 2007, 7:21 pm
J. 875 (2007), which is generally about KSR v. [read post]