Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[22na22]

Thanks for sharing this article - I had never seen it. Gene Quinn does a pretty good job, although I disagree with him sometimes.

To recap:

1. Bristol v Teva

* Taranto - dissent (pro-IP)

* O'Malley - concurred with Newman (anti-IP)

2. I/P v AOL

* None of our judges

3. Soverain v Newegg

* Prost - concurred with Newman (anti-IP)

----------------------------------------

In none of these cases is Prost, O'Malley, or Taranto the writer of the opinion.

In any case, Taranto was the dissenter in a 2-1 Bristol loss.

None of these judges have been "top dogs." None of them seem to be the types who would operate sua sponte at this point.