<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: KSR - A Whack at the Presumption of Validity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/</link>
	<description>Academic commentary about patent law, i.p. law, creativity, and more</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:41:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Patent Baristas &#187; It&#8217;s Obvious That Everyone&#8217;s Talking KSR</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/#comment-104156</link>
		<dc:creator>Patent Baristas &#187; It&#8217;s Obvious That Everyone&#8217;s Talking KSR</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/#comment-104156</guid>
		<description>[...] KSR - A Whack at the Presumption of Validity (Fire of Genius) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] KSR - A Whack at the Presumption of Validity (Fire of Genius) [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan Carhart</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/#comment-53703</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan Carhart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2007 17:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2007/04/30/ksr-a-whack-at-the-presumption-of-validity/#comment-53703</guid>
		<description>Maybe not a very big ouch.  Isn't the court referring to the possibility of a weakened presumption ONLY in a case like that at bar where prior art was not disclosed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe not a very big ouch.  Isn&#8217;t the court referring to the possibility of a weakened presumption ONLY in a case like that at bar where prior art was not disclosed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
