<?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: Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims &#8212; For Now</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/</link>
	<description>Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:54:35 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Patent Baristas &#187; Tafas v. Dudas: The Continuation Wars</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/comment-page-1/#comment-58773</link>
		<dc:creator>Patent Baristas &#187; Tafas v. Dudas: The Continuation Wars</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/#comment-58773</guid>
		<description>[...] Could Add $26,000 to Patent Costs Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK Strikes Back  Posted August 2nd, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Could Add $26,000 to Patent Costs Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK Strikes Back  Posted August 2nd, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patent Baristas &#187; No Joke, Court Smacks Down New Patent Rules</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/comment-page-1/#comment-47021</link>
		<dc:creator>Patent Baristas &#187; No Joke, Court Smacks Down New Patent Rules</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/#comment-47021</guid>
		<description>[...] Could Add $26,000 to Patent Costs Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK Strikes Back  Posted April 1st, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in Patent [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Could Add $26,000 to Patent Costs Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK Strikes Back  Posted April 1st, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in Patent [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patent Baristas &#187; Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules?</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/comment-page-1/#comment-39263</link>
		<dc:creator>Patent Baristas &#187; Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:17:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/10/31/court-blocks-new-uspto-rules-on-continuations-and-claims-for-now/#comment-39263</guid>
		<description>[...] et al. v. Jon W. Dudas, et al. (1:07cv1008), the district court held that it was willing to grant GSK’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to enjoin enactment of the USPTO’s new rules, &#8220;Changes to Practice for Continued [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] et al. v. Jon W. Dudas, et al. (1:07cv1008), the district court held that it was willing to grant GSK’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to enjoin enactment of the USPTO’s new rules, &#8220;Changes to Practice for Continued [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
