Comments on: “Judge closes door on legal quirk in patent law” http://overlawyered.com/2009/07/judge-closes-door-on-legal-quirk-in-patent-law/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:26:11 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Commentor http://overlawyered.com/2009/07/judge-closes-door-on-legal-quirk-in-patent-law/comment-page-1/#comment-54135 Commentor Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:34:18 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=12229#comment-54135 It seems as though it would be highly difficult to prove malicious intent, nobody looks at the circle p as determinative of whether a patent exists or is valid anymore. It seems as though it would be highly difficult to prove malicious intent, nobody looks at the circle p as determinative of whether a patent exists or is valid anymore.

]]> By: Robert http://overlawyered.com/2009/07/judge-closes-door-on-legal-quirk-in-patent-law/comment-page-1/#comment-54121 Robert Sun, 12 Jul 2009 19:20:51 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=12229#comment-54121 I read the article. Did this judge really close the door on a legal quirk, or simply reject this one case. You'd wonder if this suit were against a company that wasn't as politically innocuous as a plastic cup maker--like a tobacco company--if the suit would have continued. I read the article. Did this judge really close the door on a legal quirk, or simply reject this one case.

You’d wonder if this suit were against a company that wasn’t as politically innocuous as a plastic cup maker–like a tobacco company–if the suit would have continued.

]]>