Wednesday 28 November 2012

Why is the Supreme Court Interested in Patent Cases? | IPWatchdog ...

Seth Waxman

Have you ever wondered why the Supreme Court is taking so many patent cases over the last few years? ?In Part I of my interview with Seth Waxman?we learned that while he was the Solicitor General of the United States, and even before ascending to that position, he advocated within the Department of Justice for at least occasionally seeking Supreme Court review of Federal Circuit cases. That lead from a trickle of cases to what has become a handful of cases year after year.

Personally I think there are plenty of cases that the Federal Circuit gets wrong and should be taken by the Supreme Court to get things correct. But that is now what the Supreme Court does. ?They are looking for meaty issues, not just to get some esoteric point of patent law correct. In fact, it is my observation that the more esoteric and the more incorrect the Federal Circuit the less likely the Supreme Court will get involved. But that is just my view from the sidelines.

Waxman, steeped in the rules, procedures and art of Supreme Court advocacy drills down deeper.

WAXMAN: Well, I think it?s a combination of several different things.? When you?re talking about patent decisions of the Federal Circuit, for purposes of answering this question it?s useful to distinguish between rulings about litigation procedure in patent cases and rulings about the meaning of substantive patent law.? With respect to the former, it?s easy to see why the Supreme Court?s interest would be piqued if a petitioner says, as it did for example in Medimmune, ?there?s a general rule that applies across all the regional circuits with respect to standing in declaratory judgment actions. ?But the Federal Circuit applies a different ?rule ?in patent cases.?? That is just the kind of disuniformity the Supreme Court is looking for.? It?s proverbial ?split in the circuits? that the Court feels it needs to address ? where a particular law or set of procedures is being interpreted or applied differently in one part of the country than another.

The paradigmatic role of the Supreme Court is to harmonize the application of federal law across the country.? So when different circuits are at loggerheads about what a particular law means, or how a particular doctrine is applied, only the Supreme Court can resolve it.? Several of the cases the Supreme Court has taken from the Federal Circuit in recent years have involved ?procedures sanction by the Federl Circuit that ddidn?t strike the Supreme Court as warranted a patent-exceptional. The declaratory judgment standard was one obvious example.

Another was the eBay case, involving the standrds for ?injunctive relief was another.? The other packet of cases are cases that annunciate substantive patent principles.? The test for obviousness.? The standard of review when one is challenging patent validity based on art that the examiner never had, arguably never had before him or her.? Subject matter eligibility for new life forms, or software, or things like that.? And there I think the Court is taking cases where it genuinely is skeptical about whether the Federal Circuit has decided the issue correctly.? And you can say that the Federal Circuit is sort of unique in this regard because by and large the Supreme Court doesn?t view its role, surprisingly, as one of error correction.? It?s not grounds for certiorari on the grounds that the 4th circuit, the 8th circuit, or the 9th circuit just decided it?s wrong.? They are looking principally for cases in which the Supreme Court is the only court that can resolve a lack of uniformity across the country.

With respect to substantive patent law, obviously that never applies because the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction so that there?s rarely an instance, maybe Coronado vs. Holmes might be some sort of example to the contrary, but there rarely is a split in the Circuits over the standard for determining obviousness with respect to a patent because no other court of appeals is ever going to answer that question.? And therefore it?s appropriate for the Supreme Court of the United States to assure itself that in fact the Federal Circuit, which has specialized jurisdiction, is in fact answering significant questions of patent doctrine in a way that the majority of the Supreme Court thinks is correct.? And that certainly characterizes a number of patent cases that the Supreme Court has taken in recent years.

The other thing I think that?s at play here, and maybe it?s the principal reason is a point that I made earlier which is our economy depends utterly on intellectual property.? That is in fostering innovation and inventiveness in the manner in which the framers of the Constitution understood needed to be fostered.? That is within appropriately countered system of protections for discoveries and inventions and novel expression.? But that doesn?t smother innovation by competitors and by others.? And because our economy is so utterly tied to intellectual property the Supreme Court correctly understands that this is a substantive area in which it is very, very important for the correct balance to be struck.

And I think the final reason for the increase in the cases is maybe the same reason that I?m attracted to doing cases like this, which is they are just darn interesting as an intellectual matter.? You get to learn about a technology that you don?t know as much about as you need to to decide a case.? And you get to learn and scrutinize and question the contours of substantive legal doctrine that you?re not otherwise familiar with.? I don?t know how comforting that is the Patent Bar.

QUINN: That?s what I was just going to say.? And I would agree with what you say, but to hear you articulate it just makes me want to sigh and say that?s exactly why I?m scared when the Supreme Court takes a case, because I understand when you look at this globally, why should patents be different?? And the argument that I always hear is is well, copyrights are an exclusive right and you?re doing it different from copyright law.? But for better or for worse since practically the beginning of intellectual property law in the United States, copyrights have been different than patents.? They?re calling them an exclusive right is almost comical because there are so many ways that you can use a copyright that directly infringes, that copies the entirety of what you?re doing that is okay.? And it?s not exclusive.? Fair use swallows these rights whole in a lot of cases.? And there is no concept of fair use in patent matters.? But how do you lay the foundation to explain that, no, these things are different?? When you can?t get an injunction as a matter of right after you?ve won, then what good is the patent because the patent is supposed to be practically an injunction when the Patent Office gives it to you.? It says, don?t do this stuff and if you do you?re going to get punished.

WAXMAN:?You?re certainly preaching to the choir on this issue.

QUINN: I know I am.

WAXMAN: But I think you?ve identified something that?s actually quite important. Which is in an era in which the Supreme Court is increasingly interested in the contours of patent law and practice.? And in which therefore most of the judges on the Federal Circuit are trying very hard to decide cases and write their opinions so that they are accessible by the Supreme Court of the United States and are written in a manner that?s sensitive to the reality that they are subject to review by not just a higher court by a court of generalists.? It?s extremely important for advocates before the Federal Circuit in anything other than the run of the mill claim construction dispute to advocate the case in a way that is sensitive to the way that whatever issues that are going to be decided may look to the Supreme Court, may look to Congress, may look to generalists generally.? And I think many of the Federal Circuit judges welcome help in this regard, welcome advocacy that?s sensitive to this new reality.? And which in the end may be all to the good.? That is having a clubby isolated bar and bench that understands all these things and the advocacy is pitched to specialists and the specialists write opinions that are intelligible to and useful for the cognoscenti is fine if you fell in that cone.? But if you?re not, it?s not that helpful and in a system in which the final review in the judiciary or in the? legislator is made by generalists it?s really important that cases be? even in a specialized area, be briefed and argued in a way that?s accessible to and intelligible by generalists.? And it may be another reason why it seems particularly edifying to me to be a resolute generalist as to all areas of the law.? And makes it less intimidating to argue patent cases before a specialized court.

TO BE CONTINUED?

Part I ??Exclusive with Seth Waxman, Supreme Court Patent Superstar

Part II ??Seth Waxman Discusses Advocacy in the Supreme Court

Source: http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/11/27/why-is-the-supreme-court-interested-in-patent-cases/id=30523/

erin andrews erin andrews tour de france instagram Magic Mike Anderson Cooper Gay adele

Tuesday 27 November 2012

Greece, markets satisfied by EU-IMF Greek debt deal

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The Greek government and financial markets were cheered on Tuesday by an agreement between euro zone finance ministers and the International Monetary Fund to reduce Greece's debt, paving the way for the release of urgently needed aid loans.

The deal, clinched at the third attempt after weeks of wrangling, removes the biggest risk of a sovereign default in the euro zone for now, ensuring the near-bankrupt country will stay afloat at least until after a 2013 German general election.

"Tomorrow, a new day starts for all Greeks," Prime Minister Antonis Samaras told reporters at 3 a.m. in Athens after staying up to follow the tense Brussels negotiations.

After 12 hours of talks, international lenders agreed on a package of measures to reduce Greek debt by more than 40 billion euros, projected to cut it to 124 percent of gross domestic product by 2020.

In an additional new promise, ministers committed to taking further steps to lower Greece's debt to "significantly below 110 percent" in 2022.

That was a veiled acknowledgement that some write-off of loans may be necessary in 2016, the point when Greece is forecast to reach a primary budget surplus, although Germany and its northern allies continue to reject such a step publicly.

Analyst Alex White of JP Morgan called it "another moment of ?creative ambiguity' to match the June (EU) Summit deal on legacy bank assets; i.e. a statement from which all sides can take a degree of comfort".

The euro strengthened, European shares climbed to near a three-week high and safe haven German bonds fell on Tuesday, after the agreement to reduce Greek debt and release loans to keep the economy afloat.

"The political will to reward the Greek austerity and reform measures has already been there for a while. Now, this political will has finally been supplemented by financial support," economist Carsten Brzeski of ING said.

PARLIAMENTARY APPROVAL

To reduce the debt pile, ministers agreed to cut the interest rate on official loans, extend the maturity of Greece's loans from the EFSF bailout fund by 15 years to 30 years, and grant a 10-year interest repayment deferral on those loans.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said Athens had to come close to achieving a primary surplus, where state income covers its expenditure, excluding the huge debt repayments.

"When Greece has achieved, or is about to achieve, a primary surplus and fulfilled all of its conditions, we will, if need be, consider further measures for the reduction of the total debt," Schaeuble said.

Eurogroup Chairman Jean-Claude Juncker said ministers would formally approve the release of a major aid installment needed to recapitalize Greece's teetering banks and enable the government to pay wages, pensions and suppliers on December 13 - after those national parliaments that need to approve the package do so.

The German and Dutch lower houses of parliament and the Grand Committee of the Finnish parliament have to endorse the deal. Losing no time, Schaeuble said he had asked German lawmakers to vote on the package this week.

Greece will receive 43.7 billion euros in four installments once it fulfils all conditions. The 34.4 billion euro December payment will comprise 23.8 billion for banks and 10.6 billion in budget assistance.

The IMF's share, less than a third of the total, will be paid out only once a buy-back of Greek debt has occurred in the coming weeks, but IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said the Fund had no intention of pulling out of the program.

Austrian Chancellor Werner Faymann welcomed the deal but said Greece still had a long way to go to get its finances and economy into shape. Vice Chancellor Michael Spindelegger told reporters the important thing had been keeping the IMF on board.

"It had threatened to go in a direction that the IMF would exit Greek financing. This was averted and this is decisive for us Europeans," he said.

The debt buy-back was the part of the package on which the least detail was disclosed, to try to avoid giving hedge funds an opportunity to push up prices. Officials have previously talked of a 10 billion euro program to buy debt back from private investors at about 35 cents in the euro.

The ministers promised to hand back 11 billion euros in profits accruing to their national central banks from European Central Bank purchases of discounted Greek government bonds in the secondary market.

BETTER FUTURE

The deal substantially reduces the risk of a Greek exit from the single currency area, unless political turmoil were to bring down Samaras's pro-bailout coalition and pass power to radical leftists or rightists.

The biggest opposition party, the hard left SYRIZA, which now leads Samaras's center-right New Democracy in opinion polls, dismissed the deal and said it fell short of what was needed to make Greece's debt affordable.

Greece, where the euro zone's debt crisis erupted in late 2009, is proportionately the currency area's most heavily indebted country, despite a big cut this year in the value of privately-held debt. Its economy has shrunk by nearly 25 percent in five years.

Negotiations had been stalled over how Greece's debt, forecast to peak at 190-200 percent of GDP in the coming two years, could be cut to a more bearable 120 percent by 2020.

The agreed figure fell slightly short of that goal, and the IMF insisted that euro zone ministers should make a firm commitment to further steps to reduce the debt if Athens faithfully implements its budget and reform program.

The main question remains whether Greek debt can become affordable without euro zone governments having to write off some of the loans they have made to Athens.

Germany and its northern European allies have hitherto rejected any idea of forgiving official loans to Athens, but European Union officials believe that line may soften after next September's German general election.

Schaeuble told reporters that it was legally impossible for Germany and other countries to forgive debt while simultaneously giving new loan guarantees. That did not explicitly preclude debt relief at a later stage, once Greece completes its adjustment program and no longer needs new loans.

But senior conservative German lawmaker Gerda Hasselfeldt said there was no legal possibility for a debt "haircut" for Greece in the future either.

At Germany's insistence, earmarked revenue and aid payments will go into a strengthened "segregated account" to ensure that Greece services its debts.

A source familiar with IMF thinking said a loan write-off once Greece has fulfilled its program would be the simplest way to make its debt viable, but other methods such as forgoing interest payments, or lending at below market rates and extending maturities could all help.

German central bank governor Jens Weidmann has suggested that Greece could "earn" a reduction in debt it owes to euro zone governments in a few years if it diligently implements all the agreed reforms. The European Commission backs that view.

The ministers agreed to reduce interest on already extended bilateral loans in stages from the current 150 basis points above financing costs to 50 bps.

(Additional reporting by Annika Breidhardt, Robin Emmott and John O'Donnell in Brussels, Andreas Rinke and Noah Barkin in Berlin, Michael Shields in Vienna; Writing by Paul Taylor; editing by David Stamp)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/euro-zone-imf-secure-deal-cutting-greek-debt-115610160--finance.html

westminster bonnaroo 2012 lineup twisted metal sea lion si swimsuit 2012 westminster dog show abe lincoln vampire hunter

Monday 26 November 2012

Figaro | New Pasta Meals! - Foodie from the Metro

As December draws close, go and feast yourself upon the new glorious pasta selections from Figaro! Officially launching by the last week of November, there are three pasta dishes now made available to suit your tastes.

First up would be the Figaro Meaty Lasagna,?the perfect for foodies who are looking for layers and layers of rich meaty sauce, creamy cheese, and al dente?pasta: the good 'ol lasagna as what others may say! For a finishing touch, a generous layer of golden melted cheese will be slathered on top and sure enough: this was such a joy to eat!

Figaro Meaty Lasagna (P200.00)


The second dish offered is the?Figaro Chicken Parmigiano:?this is composed of tender breaded chicken which is tossed along with the pasta and some homemade tomato and two cheese sauce. Subtle and modest, this could fill you up in a jiffy!

Figaro Chicken Parmigiano (P180.00)

Last of the series: the?Figaro Seafood Pomarola!?A pomarola?is a distinct Italian sauce which is some sort of equivalent for the ever-popular marinara and this is exactly what this dish delivers. Filled with plump shrimps, tomatoes, and spices, this is my favorite of all of the three! A definite must-try!

Figaro Seafood Pomarola (P180.00)

Each of these dishes have their own personality once served on the table and it's up for you to choose! I say, if you're looking for a hearty fulfilling meal, go for the lasagna, but if you want something rich and savory, go for the pomarola!


Other Existing Promos

Figaro also has current promos that you shouldn't miss!

  1. For UnionBank Credit Card holders: Enjoy 10% discount for every P200 minimum single receipt purchase of food and beverage at Figaro.
  2. For BDO Credit Card holders: When you buy 1, you get 1 free on their milk tea, brewed coffee, and bakes selections
  3. For BPI Card holders: Get a free hot drink on your order of Figaro's specialty cakes.
  4. Free P100 Figaro Gift Voucher: Whenever you buy P350 worth of Conzace?at Watson stores.

"Foodie from the Metro" :?Figaro | New Pasta Meals

Source: http://www.foodiefromthemetro.com/2012/11/figaro-new-pasta-meals.html

oklahoma news nascar news doppler radar colorado rockies moonshine news channel 4 radar weather