InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 88
Posts 5985
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/19/2007

Re: nonsequetor post# 17018

Thursday, 10/16/2014 4:20:15 AM

Thursday, October 16, 2014 4:20:15 AM

Post# of 97094
And then reading this:

In its Final Written Decision, the Board found that Petitioner proved that claims 1-3 of the ’105 Patent are unpatentable. The ’105 Patent relates to monitoring the level of a substance in a liquid, particularly the level of glucose in blood.

And then to add to it:

Patent Owner next argued that the combination of Winarta and Schulman fails to meet all limitations of the challenged claims, but the Board found this unpersuasive because Patent Owner only addressed the references individually and not in a combination. The Board then found that once again, Patent Owner’s evidence of secondary considerations was not enough to overcome the obviousness finding.



And who is this board? Legal minds (judges) scientists and professionals. And they decided in favour of DECN against J&J. Well if this is not good enough for me, what then. If we Need more evidence of the Quality of the DECN Management, this is it. They beat J&J 3 times and this speaks for the qualification of K.B. as CEO of DECN.