|
Monaghan posted:I'm stil waiting to see if any of my clients look me up on facebook and see my cosplay photos. So far they haven't mentioned it. Share them so that we might proffer our opinions.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
mastershakeman posted:My standard of living would be great if my wife paid for everything and my dad gave me a bunch of fun money Marry up. That's how I get by every soul crushing day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Compusaurus posted:Marry up. That's how I get by every soul crushing day. I did but haven't yet sold her on my plan of being a stay at home dad. Yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Share them so that we might proffer our opinions. I'll spare this thread the sight of me shirtless, with a red coat and white wig. I loving nailed the sword though. http://i.imgur.com/1Au1GGI.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I did but haven't yet sold her on my plan of being a stay at home dad. Yet. I only half-jokingly tell her that's the plan in six years when she is finished with residency. I'm hoping she'll be too busy to notice that I'm not working anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I did but haven't yet sold her on my plan of being a stay at home dad. Yet. "So, I can be a stay at home mom when you're done with law school, right?" "Yeah, about that..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
So, oc responded to our rejection of settlement with a bitchy and sarcastic insult. That's good, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:So, oc responded to our rejection of settlement with a bitchy and sarcastic insult. That's good, right? Yeah. It's good whenever you get someone to lose their cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Yes, but...duchesne. He was probated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Hey guys, he's what happens when ypu go to law school in russia: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3729768
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
hey patent dudes: Let's say an examiner is examining an application claiming priority from a jumbo spec provisional, with other siblings filed on the same day claiming priority to same provisional, where sibling discloses, but doesn't claim, claims at issue. Does the examiner issue double patenting rejection over every other patent and non-abandoned application with a "comprising" transitional phrase in any claim, on the theory that, e.g., claims from other patent + spec from sibling = obvious to do claimed invention along with invention from patent because the spec from sibling (a programmable computer/system/etc. can be programmed to do more than one thing on the same time; obvious to use one computer to save money instead of buying two computers)? asking for a friend
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
nm posted:Hey guys, he's what happens when ypu go to law school in russia: Yeah but I bet his student loans are like nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:hey patent dudes: No. Go reread MPEP 804 II.B.1. "When considering whether the invention defined in a claim of an application would have been an obvious variation of the invention defined in the claim of a patent, the disclosure of the patent may not be used as prior art." General Foods v Studiengesellschaft, 972 F2d 1272.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
Nerrrrrrdddddddssssssssss
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Toona the Cat posted:"So, I can be a stay at home mom when you're done with law school, right?" http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/20/us/many-women-at-elite-colleges-set-career-path-to-motherhood.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Kalman posted:No. Go reread MPEP 804 II.B.1. "When considering whether the invention defined in a claim of an application would have been an obvious variation of the invention defined in the claim of a patent, the disclosure of the patent may not be used as prior art." General Foods v Studiengesellschaft, 972 F2d 1272. A patent's sibling's disclosure is not the patent's disclosure
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Share them so that we might proffer our opinions. He almost fell for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:A patent's sibling's disclosure is not the patent's disclosure I would appeal that twice from Sunday, and win every time, because there's no good reason that the logic applying to a sibling patent's disclosure wouldn't apply to the sibling application's disclosure. The point of OTDP is to reject over claims that are obvious over one another, not over applications - if you want to reject over the spec, you'd need to 103 it. (Which you can't.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:A patent's sibling's disclosure is not the patent's disclosure Sounds like you really want to issue this rejection. I think you should go for it since examiners are immune to consequence from their actions. By the way have examiners received a memo for the Williamson v Citrix 112f decision yet? My coworkers in the software/controls section are mad upset over it since a huge percent of jp apps claim "module", "unit", etc. (if not "means" straight up) and they have to translate based on the jp app.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Guess what AR? The Who the hell reported this? This is supposed to be a safe place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:I'll spare this thread the sight of me shirtless, with a red coat and white wig. I loving nailed the sword though. Clean your carpet you goddamn swine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Who the hell reported this? This is supposed to be a safe place. I wouldn't be surprised if everyone who referenced that incident got one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I wouldn't be surprised if everyone who referenced that incident got one. Those pedos will circle the wagons on you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Clean your carpet you goddamn swine. GoonCouch.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Those pedos will circle the wagons on you. The thin sticky line.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Lote posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/20/us/many-women-at-elite-colleges-set-career-path-to-motherhood.html quote:Emily Lechner, one of Ms. Liu's roommates, hopes to stay home a few years, then work part time as a lawyer once her children are in school.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:The thin sticky line. "Did you order the Aa Trek!?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
Zo posted:By the way have examiners received a memo for the Williamson v Citrix 112f decision yet? My coworkers in the software/controls section are mad upset over it since a huge percent of jp apps claim "module", "unit", etc. (if not "means" straight up) and they have to translate based on the jp app. getting training tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Kalman posted:I would appeal that twice from Sunday, and win every time, because there's no good reason that the logic applying to a sibling patent's disclosure wouldn't apply to the sibling application's disclosure. The point of OTDP is to reject over claims that are obvious over one another, not over applications - if you want to reject over the spec, you'd need to 103 it. (Which you can't.) it's just a terminal disclaimer you baby Anyway, I think I'm gonna talk to my SPE about improper timewise extension because I think it's that issue. Parent claims "comprising ABC", child claims "comprising ABD" and C and D are both novel. Except it's a child, so the "timewise" part doesn't apply. Ugh. e: What I forgot before is the sibling isn't available as prior art because it has the same effective filing date, d'oh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Secks Cauldron posted:Do part-time lawyer positions even exist? Yes, in government. The only bad thing is if you work half time, your pension accumulates half as slow. One of our best lawyers works like 2/3rds time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
And a lot of government lawyers don't work at all. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Secks Cauldron posted:Do part-time lawyer positions even exist? Yeah, I know at least three who do it. It's an incredible gig if you can get it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Compusaurus posted:I only half-jokingly tell her that's the plan in six years when she is finished with residency. I'm hoping she'll be too busy to notice that I'm not working anymore. My wife is in her last year of residency. I couldn't wait and just gave notice this week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:My wife is in her last year of residency. Congrats! You're living the dream. What will you do if you're no longer commuting to the burbs? The answer is probably develop a crippling MMO addiction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Yeah, I know at least three who do it. It's an incredible gig if you can get it. Here's a 20 hour a week job as an international lawyer http://www.justice.gov/legal-careers/job/general-attorney-11
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Compusaurus posted:Congrats! You're living the dream. What will you do if you're no longer commuting to the burbs? He can start by getting out of the hinterlands.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:My wife is in her last year of residency. You gonna be a trophy husband?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Yeah, I know at least three who do it. It's an incredible gig if you can get it. One of my coworkers is part-time, it's amazing. She genuinely doesn't answer emails or do other work when she's not here, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
echopapa do you need to work when your island has no internet?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Who the hell reported this? This is supposed to be a safe place. Zeitgueist regularly name-searched himself. It stands to reason his parachute account does the same.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2015 18:28
|
|
