Search for: "Quillen v. Quillen"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jan 2015, 5:13 am
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]
27 Jan 2015, 3:17 pm
See, e.g., Gilles v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 6:09 pm
The case -- Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 9:52 am
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
’ – 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]
6 Sep 2009, 11:46 pm
See CIAS, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 1:58 pm
In PSC 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]
28 Mar 2009, 4:40 pm
Quillen, Jr. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 11:39 pm
‟" Id. at 1125 (quoting Quillen v. [read post]
14 Nov 2008, 2:16 pm
Gene Quinn notes that oral argument in USPTO v. [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 9:21 am
" Markman v. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 6:01 pm
The KSR Int'l Co. v. [read post]
29 May 2008, 10:14 am
Quillen 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]
24 Aug 2007, 10:37 am
Quillen, Jr. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 7:21 pm
J. 875 (2007), which is generally about KSR v. [read post]
