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


« California Lawyers Association Present Virtual Conference Celebrating California Regional Office | Main | More on Professor Sarnoff's Perspective on Tillis Patent Eligibility Bill »

August 08, 2022


That two interested experts here cannot agree on fundamental interpretations of terminology in even one aspect of this draft statute [and see also all the just posted comments in Patently-O and IPWatchdog] seems to suggest potentially dangerous unpredictability in the hands of the judiciary?

"seems to suggest" is - by any stretch of the imagination - putting it mildly.

Quite in fact, this attempt is a STILL-BORN attempt, UNLESS Congress also employs its power of jurisdiction stripping (and remove the Supreme Court from even having a chance of RE-legislating from the Bench).

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