<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bilski Goes En Banc</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/</link>
	<description>Academic commentary about patent law, i.p. law, creativity, and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:04:51 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/comment-page-1/#comment-172919</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/#comment-172919</guid>
		<description>Rajath,
The court hasn&#039;t issued an opinion yet in Bilski.
But, we should see one soon.
Thanks,
Joe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rajath,<br />
The court hasn&#8217;t issued an opinion yet in Bilski.<br />
But, we should see one soon.<br />
Thanks,<br />
Joe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rajath</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/comment-page-1/#comment-172898</link>
		<dc:creator>rajath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 06:13:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/#comment-172898</guid>
		<description>Hey what is the progress of the case,which is reviewing the state street case? Have they cancel the patent?
Please let us know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey what is the progress of the case,which is reviewing the state street case? Have they cancel the patent?<br />
Please let us know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patent Baristas &#187; Bilski: Much Ado About (almost) Nothing</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/comment-page-1/#comment-136137</link>
		<dc:creator>Patent Baristas &#187; Bilski: Much Ado About (almost) Nothing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/#comment-136137</guid>
		<description>[...] Since then, both the patent law community (see, e.g., here, here and here) and the mainstream media (e.g., here and here) have been all atwitter about the possibility of a major shift in patent law and the possible end of business method or software patents (or both). While the excitement is understandable, in this case I think itâ€™s misplaced. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Since then, both the patent law community (see, e.g., here, here and here) and the mainstream media (e.g., here and here) have been all atwitter about the possibility of a major shift in patent law and the possible end of business method or software patents (or both). While the excitement is understandable, in this case I think itâ€™s misplaced. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Law Bites &#187; IP Think Tank Global Week in Review - 22 February 2008</title>
		<link>http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/comment-page-1/#comment-131651</link>
		<dc:creator>Law Bites &#187; IP Think Tank Global Week in Review - 22 February 2008</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefireofgenius.com/2008/02/15/bilski-goes-en-banc/#comment-131651</guid>
		<description>[...] Full CAFC to reexamine the scope of subject matter patentability for business methods, also to consider whether it is appropriate to reconsider or overrule State Street Bank &amp; Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., and AT&amp;T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc: (Patently-O), (PLI), (IP Updates), (Techdirt), (The Fire of Genius), (Patent Troll Tracker), (Anticipate This! ), (Washington State Patent Law Blog), (The IP Factor), (IPBiz), (IP Spotlight), (IP Law360), (Innovationpartners), (IPBiz), [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Full CAFC to reexamine the scope of subject matter patentability for business methods, also to consider whether it is appropriate to reconsider or overrule State Street Bank &amp; Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., and AT&amp;T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc: (Patently-O), (PLI), (IP Updates), (Techdirt), (The Fire of Genius), (Patent Troll Tracker), (Anticipate This! ), (Washington State Patent Law Blog), (The IP Factor), (IPBiz), (IP Spotlight), (IP Law360), (Innovationpartners), (IPBiz), [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
