Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
6,716.09
(
0.25%
)
US TECH 100
24,130.00
(
0.48%
)
Dow Jones
46,993.26
(
0.10%
)
Brent Oil
99.69
(
-0.96%
)
Bitcoin
74,367.61
(
0.58%
)
News Focus
News Focus
Post# of 257253
Next 10
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

DewDiligence

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 842
Posts 122793
Boards Moderated 10
Alias Born 09/05/2002

DewDiligence

Member Level

Re: investorgold2002 post# 120639

Monday, 05/30/2011 9:29:29 AM

Monday, May 30, 2011 9:29:29 AM

Post# of 257253

What is the case for Obviousness or Non-infringement?

My previous post addressed the argument for non-infringement. The argument for unenforceability due to obviousness is that Teva’s patents at issue in the lawsuit constituted a double-patenting abuse, i.e. they were obvious extensions of prior patents that have long since expired.

“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Trade Smarter with Thousands

Leverage decades of market experience shared openly.

Join Now