InvestorsHub Logo

money_man

04/08/20 8:57 PM

#264149 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Bravo, Bravo!!! Succinctly stated and clear to see. Well written and well referenced. Thank you for taking on this important work.

L0tsaluck2000

04/08/20 9:00 PM

#264151 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Someone has indicated it is peer reviewed and highly regarded journal. Please check. Also check the Journals impact factor, a measure of its significance. You might also check how many times the article was cited and downloaded between when it was published and the patent approved.

The Irishman

04/08/20 9:05 PM

#264155 RE: jomama9231 #264143

jomama9231: Doc, are you sending this? Please confirm.i have been sending many of the comments and opinions along since last week. If you have or will be then I will refrain from doing so. By the way, well written.

Be well

Mikenac

04/08/20 9:08 PM

#264157 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Excellent job. Thank you.

Lemmiwinks

04/08/20 9:15 PM

#264161 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Fantastic. Maybe just mention the cropped table judge du and defendants cited with p* and P+ conveniently left out.

circuitcity

04/08/20 9:25 PM

#264166 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Doc, great write up.

One minor suggestion is on one sentence in the front:

Judge Du makes a fact error because the above statement is entirely incorrect

Can I suggest to add something like “and actually it is exactly contrary to Authors conclusion”.

Another suggestion, I don’t quite get the second error you said Du made. Maybe just me.

Great work, thanks for doing this.

Lemmiwinks

04/08/20 9:42 PM

#264180 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Also may want to include that no patient had trigs over 400. Not one. How can this be used to invalidate patents for trigs specifically over 500?

Restingzebra

04/09/20 12:08 AM

#264205 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Great job. Well done. Thank you very much. Perhaps you should copy Kennedy and Thero too.

alm2

04/09/20 1:46 AM

#264213 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Excellent work ... can you do the same as to Mori?
Alm

invest2992

04/09/20 8:57 AM

#264243 RE: jomama9231 #264143

Since I have not read all of the briefs and am not a doctor, I'm awed by your due diligence. it reads fine to me and should probably be forwarded. I don't see how it could hurt our position and I'd like to know atty's covered every angle.