you are viewing a single comment's thread.
Once again, you are making false statements. The proof will be your post citing the link and exact wording you claim exists in the CAFC ruling. See my previous post.Try reading page 36 of the following document.http://www.patentlyo.com/files/09-1263.pdfYour statements are inconsistent with the conclusions of the CAFC. Also, Judge Robinson says she is ready to rule!XQ