E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.

Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.

  • Law Blogs

Become a Fan

« Court Report | Main | Defendants File Petition for Rehearing in AMP v. USPTO »

August 29, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451ca1469e2014e8b140c33970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Plaintiff(s) File Petition for Rehearing in AMP v. USPTO -- Update:

Comments

Kevin,

I'll repeat my prior comment: The plaintiff petitioning for rehearing in this case should be careful of what they ask for. An en banc Federal Circuit could also potentially overturn the panel's ruling on the patent-ineligible method claims.

Perhaps, but they would be wise to await the Supreme Court's decision in Prometheus.

Thanks for the comment

Kevin,

Ah, that Prometheus case again (and you're correct in your point made)! And we still haven't heard anything about Classen either.

The comments to this entry are closed.

September 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30