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.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

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

Contact the Docs


  • "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.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« Conference & CLE Calendar | Main | CardioNet, LLC v. InfoBionic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) »

November 14, 2021


In other words, the Executive Branch informs the Legislative Branch to take a flying leap, and will regurgitate their desired narrative when they feel like it, and only to the extent that they feel like it.

Are there any "D's" out there that still think that 45 was more authoritarian than 46?

Mean tweets do not count.



So less than a full set of the Senate IP Subcommittee minority, plus a smattering of minority Judiciary Committee members and some other random R Senators, who all told don't amount to a majority in their own party, let alone in the entire Senate, is now equivalent to [checks notes] the entire "Legislative Branch"? Can I subscribe to your political science newsletter?

Hey Chester, did you read through that article?

There's some serious misrepresentations and s t r e t c h i n g to reach those check marks (ESPECIALLY in view of the current administration).

That piece actually proves my point: 46 is FAR MORE authoritarian than 45 ever was.

“[T]he Senators posed ten questions intended ‘to help us better understand this decision to support intellectual property theft and forced technological transfer…’”

It should be short work answering those questions. No U.S. official is supporting IP “theft” (what does that word even *mean* in the context of IP?), nor forced tech transfer. The whole premise of the exercise is misbegotten, so there is nothing for the senators to understand.


Did you see where I stated "entire?"

Put your strawman away please, and try to grasp the actual point presented.

Mr. DeLassus, THAT it may indeed be a matter of "short work," makes it all the more galling that the Executive Branch has chosen its path. You too seem to be misapplying what is "misbegotten" here - no doubt in your effort NOT to look at the party that you would rather support.

These are signs of self-delusion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

May 2024

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 31