After more than 60 briefs on both sides, oral arguments last November and an eight-month vigil for the ruling among patent lawyers, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Bilski v. Kappos issued yesterday may have done little to end the debate over what kinds of innovations are or are not eligible for patents.
June 29, 2010 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
WASHINGTON, D.C. – In the end, Bilski v. Kappos may have been a bust.
After more than 60 briefs on both sides, oral arguments last November and an eight-month vigil for the ruling among patent lawyers, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bilski issued yesterday may have done little to end the debate over what kinds of innovations are or are not eligible for patents.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
DEPUTY PORT ATTORNEY III Oakland, CA Salary: $17,294 - $21,419/month, 37.5-hr work week Your Port. Your Community. Your Career. Whe...
Stern, Lavinthal & Frankenberg, LLC, is seeking a foreclosure attorney experienced in the NJ and/or NY foreclosure process and default l...
Mineola defense firm seeks attorneys with 3-5 years of actual insurance defense experience to handle complex general liability matters. Sala...
