|
|
|
|
||
Re: 3.10--- the obvious?: this should hold until the next decision, and Ed /LDMYou agree? According to the interpretation I posted, the CAFC didn't think Baxter had a viable claim if the PTAB wiped out its patent. So it really couldn't win, once the PTAB invalidated its claim. Correct? |
return to message board, top of board |
Msg # | Subject | Author | Recs | Date Posted |
115546 | Re: 3.10--- the obvious?: this should hold until the next decision, and Ed /LDM | joeytakasugi | 1 | 12/3/2016 9:39:15 PM |