InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

HinduKush

03/26/21 9:31 AM

#331415 RE: alm2 #331403

Nicley stated Alm,
Any proposition has the right to be made but not blindly adopted without rigorous examination especially by a judge in a patent court.

It is akin to the observation of the eye in a flat landscape that the earth is flat - (the eye we know deceives )but the proposition can be made -“all that I see is flat and so the earth must be “


Not so long ago (1610) Galileo was persecuted and imprisoned for heresy by the Holy Mother Church for daring to question the divine if not axiomatic Truth of heliocentrism, the astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the centre of the Solar System. That the earth was the epicentre of the universe was also considered blindingly obvious by all the religious leaders, and men of thought and reason of the period. It was of course absolutely wrong.
HK
icon url

marjac

03/26/21 10:29 AM

#331430 RE: alm2 #331403

You see this clearly, alm, and have seen it clearly since the beginning. The Court's prima facie obviousness determination relied largely on Mori and Kurabayashi.

For that reliance to legitimately support the Court's determination, Mori and Kurabayashi must be scientifically sound. If they are not scientifically sound, as I believe has been conclusively established by Jarvis, HK, Curfman, Bhatt, then the prima obviousness determination must be vacated on grounds of mistake.