I'll be going into patent litigation after graduation and was wondering how often patent disputes actually reach the technology instead of procedural stuff.
By procedural, I mean basically just finding some reason why a patent is invalid because it missed some kind of deadline or a prior art event occurred, etc. Basically everything that doesn't talk about the distinction between the alleged infringement and the allegedly infringed claim.
Technology would encompass everything else. For example, things like how the invention actually works to distinguish itself from prior art, why a term or a claim should be interpreted as such, etc.
There are probably issues where my definitions of "procedural" and "technology" overlap because of the simplified distinction, but I hope the point of the question was clear enough.
Patent litigation - how often does the case reach the actual technology instead of just procedural stuff? Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431106
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
