http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/11/oral-argument-in-bilski.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:59:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/11/oral-argument-in-bilski.html/comment-page-1#comment-66200 Christa Laser Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:03:57 +0000 http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=21992#comment-66200 You mention that 102 and 103 haven't been good gatekeepers, but what about 112? I am currently performing empirical research for a note on claim definiteness and, though not yet statistically significant, claim definiteness seems to disproportionately thwart software-on-hardware patents. You mention that 102 and 103 haven’t been good gatekeepers, but what about 112? I am currently performing empirical research for a note on claim definiteness and, though not yet statistically significant, claim definiteness seems to disproportionately thwart software-on-hardware patents.

]]> http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/11/oral-argument-in-bilski.html/comment-page-1#comment-66176 Joe Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:09:27 +0000 http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=21992#comment-66176 "Potentially patentable?" That's so vague. “Potentially patentable?” That’s so vague.

]]> http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2009/11/oral-argument-in-bilski.html/comment-page-1#comment-66175 Lässt der US Supreme Court Softwarepatenten die Luft ab? : Verfassungsblog Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:57:26 +0000 http://www.concurringopinions.com/?p=21992#comment-66175 [...] Gerald Magliocca auf Concurring Opinions notiert: I don’t think that the Court will take down software patents in this case, but I think [...] [...] Gerald Magliocca auf Concurring Opinions notiert: I don’t think that the Court will take down software patents in this case, but I think [...]

]]>