“So, let’s be clear: he is not qualified. Not qualified. That is the start and end of it.”
Not really. According to you, Rader, a history major, is qualified. And I already demonstrated to you with the example of Bill Lee that your criteria (and it is your criteria, as it’s too narrow and bizarre to be anybody else’s criteria) is complete bullsh!t.
20
They definately need a law to keep these judges on the progress side of human advancement. Anyone producing a new marketable valuable invention should be entitled to a patent without another party suceeding at invalidating it. Its a terrible disincentive to create jobs revenues and exports to allow the thefted usage
19
And just to dig into the substance: it took me years and years to understand science and years to understand patent law. But, I am sure he teaching patent law at Harvard just imbued him with all that knowledge with no work. And, I am sure just somehow or another he will just know all the things I’ve learned from practicing patent law. And working with innovation. Just magically.
So, let’s be clear: he is not qualified. Not qualified. That is the start and end of it.
Won’t be able to read a patent. Won’t be able to understand a license agreement. Won’t be able to understand an office action. Won’t be able to understand a Markman hearing. Won’t be able to understand how to weigh expert testimony.
So, he won’t be able to lead. What a sad little Rome we live in. I know, I know, you type thinks it is cyclic. That somehow or another magically all will be cleansed and we shall emerge just fine.
Funny, though, that does not seem to be what is happening to this country or world. We seem to be heating up the planet, over populating the planet, plunging 10’s of millions into poverty, losing our middle class, losing our rights, etc.
But, he is appointed to be a judge when he has never practiced patent law and can’t understand science.
But, it is fine….
18
“[A]nonymous wonder” well that’s an improvement from some of the other things you’ve called me.
The real question is can he read a patent? Probably not. Can he understand the technology? Probably not. Is he smart enough to figure these things out? Probably. Will he put the time and effort to do so? Probably not.
Will we see 20 years of bizarre opinions that have no basis in science or patent law? Probably.
Will wannabes blunt his acuity so that he doesn’t notice or care? Probably.
I am sure J. Moore would rather spend her afternoon at her pool in her back yard than figure out why her reading of a patent application is wrong. And, this block would rather have a bourbon with you than figure out the Church-Turing Thesis or how amplification works with DNA.
So, another brick from our foundation has been removed. Cheers!
17
“You’re like a child having a temper tantrum.”
LOL – pot, meet kettle.
“I don’t drink with children. Or offer them lollipops to get them to hush up.”
LOL – or other reasons…
Like I said, put these two in a room together and you won’t be able to tell them apart.
16
Good – I still have your attention. It’s so hard to see that when you completely disappear from threads when the going gets tough for you (another bad habit you’ve picked up from Malcolm).
15
I’d rather have a bourbon with him, or Lemley for that matter, than an anonymous wonder like yourself who thinks it’s okay to call federal appeals court nominees and fellow professionals names. You’re like a child having a temper tantrum. I don’t drink with children. Or offer them lollipops to get them to hush up.
14
I am sure he is a fine person to have a bourbon with, AAA JJ, which appears to be your standard for judging people.
As I have said before: some of us care about patent law and innovation. The all is going to be fine is something I don’t believe. I am sure all will be fine for enough for you AAA JJ for the remainder of your life.
My guess is that the way your mind processes–self interest no global rules.
13
101 IE’s comments/questions were direced to Leo.
12
“Does Judge Taranto have any say in the outcome of the Alice case?
Not sure where to place Taranto on my scorecard yet.”
good question – anyone with anything intelligent to add to this particular point?
11
101 IE,
AAA JJ was just lashing out (again, just being a bit wipery). He figured he would try to kick up as much dust as possible to hide his shame.
He figured incorrectly.
10
101 IE – he’s just torqued because I (rightfully) compared him to NWPA on another thread.
He’s just acting all wipery right now. He may calm down over the weekend.
9
LOL – you’ve been hanging around Malcolm for too long.
You too have left oout key elements.
Tell me – does your firm employ a spam filter on your email?
8
AAA JJ you are sounding more like MM and Ned in your postings. What gives? I thought you were on the pro patent side. :/
7
“I’m pretty sure he’s anti-patent. He’s never performed integration analysis.”
How would you know Judge Taranto never performed “Integration Analysis”? After all it’s controlling precedent in Diehr and explicitly affirmed so in Prometheus. Not to mention the Official USPTO Guidance on Integration which anyone is free to click on and read here.
Besides, not being familiar with the legal concept of “integration” and/or never having performed the applicable analysis does not mean you are anti patent.
However choosing to NOT apply “Integration Analysis” to certain claims solely because doing so could result in those claims being declared as valid patents, does make you at least biased against those particular types of patents.
Wouldn’t you agree LB?
6
I don’t know, but my guess is that he would find that a better policy than having the mail room staff open letters and throw away prior art so that attorneys don’t know about it.
5
Yes, but the real question is, how does he feel about “APPEAL EVERYTHING”TM?
4
I’m pretty sure he lies and kills kittens in the basement of court house in between hypnotizing the other two panel members into agreeing with him to invalidate every patent that comes across his dockets.
3
I’m pretty sure he’s anti-patent. He’s never performed integration analysis.
2
Does Judge Taranto have any say in the outcome of the Alice case?
Not sure where to place Taranto on my scorecard yet.
1
Uhoh, a little piece of blue sky just fell into my lap.
“So, let’s be clear: he is not qualified. Not qualified. That is the start and end of it.”
Not really. According to you, Rader, a history major, is qualified. And I already demonstrated to you with the example of Bill Lee that your criteria (and it is your criteria, as it’s too narrow and bizarre to be anybody else’s criteria) is complete bullsh!t.
They definately need a law to keep these judges on the progress side of human advancement. Anyone producing a new marketable valuable invention should be entitled to a patent without another party suceeding at invalidating it. Its a terrible disincentive to create jobs revenues and exports to allow the thefted usage
And just to dig into the substance: it took me years and years to understand science and years to understand patent law. But, I am sure he teaching patent law at Harvard just imbued him with all that knowledge with no work. And, I am sure just somehow or another he will just know all the things I’ve learned from practicing patent law. And working with innovation. Just magically.
So, let’s be clear: he is not qualified. Not qualified. That is the start and end of it.
Won’t be able to read a patent. Won’t be able to understand a license agreement. Won’t be able to understand an office action. Won’t be able to understand a Markman hearing. Won’t be able to understand how to weigh expert testimony.
So, he won’t be able to lead. What a sad little Rome we live in. I know, I know, you type thinks it is cyclic. That somehow or another magically all will be cleansed and we shall emerge just fine.
Funny, though, that does not seem to be what is happening to this country or world. We seem to be heating up the planet, over populating the planet, plunging 10’s of millions into poverty, losing our middle class, losing our rights, etc.
But, he is appointed to be a judge when he has never practiced patent law and can’t understand science.
But, it is fine….
“[A]nonymous wonder” well that’s an improvement from some of the other things you’ve called me.
The real question is can he read a patent? Probably not. Can he understand the technology? Probably not. Is he smart enough to figure these things out? Probably. Will he put the time and effort to do so? Probably not.
Will we see 20 years of bizarre opinions that have no basis in science or patent law? Probably.
Will wannabes blunt his acuity so that he doesn’t notice or care? Probably.
I am sure J. Moore would rather spend her afternoon at her pool in her back yard than figure out why her reading of a patent application is wrong. And, this block would rather have a bourbon with you than figure out the Church-Turing Thesis or how amplification works with DNA.
So, another brick from our foundation has been removed. Cheers!
“You’re like a child having a temper tantrum.”
LOL – pot, meet kettle.
“I don’t drink with children. Or offer them lollipops to get them to hush up.”
LOL – or other reasons…
Like I said, put these two in a room together and you won’t be able to tell them apart.
Good – I still have your attention. It’s so hard to see that when you completely disappear from threads when the going gets tough for you (another bad habit you’ve picked up from Malcolm).
I’d rather have a bourbon with him, or Lemley for that matter, than an anonymous wonder like yourself who thinks it’s okay to call federal appeals court nominees and fellow professionals names. You’re like a child having a temper tantrum. I don’t drink with children. Or offer them lollipops to get them to hush up.
I am sure he is a fine person to have a bourbon with, AAA JJ, which appears to be your standard for judging people.
As I have said before: some of us care about patent law and innovation. The all is going to be fine is something I don’t believe. I am sure all will be fine for enough for you AAA JJ for the remainder of your life.
My guess is that the way your mind processes–self interest no global rules.
101 IE’s comments/questions were direced to Leo.
“Does Judge Taranto have any say in the outcome of the Alice case?
Not sure where to place Taranto on my scorecard yet.”
good question – anyone with anything intelligent to add to this particular point?
101 IE,
AAA JJ was just lashing out (again, just being a bit wipery). He figured he would try to kick up as much dust as possible to hide his shame.
He figured incorrectly.
101 IE – he’s just torqued because I (rightfully) compared him to NWPA on another thread.
He’s just acting all wipery right now. He may calm down over the weekend.
LOL – you’ve been hanging around Malcolm for too long.
You too have left oout key elements.
Tell me – does your firm employ a spam filter on your email?
AAA JJ you are sounding more like MM and Ned in your postings. What gives? I thought you were on the pro patent side. :/
“I’m pretty sure he’s anti-patent. He’s never performed integration analysis.”
How would you know Judge Taranto never performed “Integration Analysis”? After all it’s controlling precedent in Diehr and explicitly affirmed so in Prometheus. Not to mention the Official USPTO Guidance on Integration which anyone is free to click on and read here.
link to uspto.gov
Besides, not being familiar with the legal concept of “integration” and/or never having performed the applicable analysis does not mean you are anti patent.
However choosing to NOT apply “Integration Analysis” to certain claims solely because doing so could result in those claims being declared as valid patents, does make you at least biased against those particular types of patents.
Wouldn’t you agree LB?
I don’t know, but my guess is that he would find that a better policy than having the mail room staff open letters and throw away prior art so that attorneys don’t know about it.
Yes, but the real question is, how does he feel about “APPEAL EVERYTHING”TM?
I’m pretty sure he lies and kills kittens in the basement of court house in between hypnotizing the other two panel members into agreeing with him to invalidate every patent that comes across his dockets.
I’m pretty sure he’s anti-patent. He’s never performed integration analysis.
Does Judge Taranto have any say in the outcome of the Alice case?
Not sure where to place Taranto on my scorecard yet.
Uhoh, a little piece of blue sky just fell into my lap.
Comments are closed.