Q: Can you argue, when you make a change you refocus on language, so literal language better be good?
(1) How does that help with advances in technology? Maybe we should do that and ask “was it foreseeable?” if you touched it again, hold to literal language unless something impossible to foresee: change in technology, etc.
(2) Problem: We’ll now fight over what was foreseeable.
(3) Do you really look at it all that more closely when you make a change, want people to take all claims seriously. Seems like assault on DOE, doesn’t really seem related to making change.
(4) Do we care about substance or procedure?
Are you a lawyer? Or, do you just knoooow the answer?
We have located some similar legal questions and legal question categories. Check out these challenging questions that askquestions about Patent Law and are similar to Can you argue, when you make a change you refocus on language, so literal language better be good?. Also, we have included a list of some of our more popular legal question categories. These categories are based on what everyone is asking and answering.
Similar Legal Questions
- What is meant by Estoppel?
- Compare claim to accused process.
- How is Claim interpretation done?
- What is meant by Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents?
- What is the Policy for Beneficial Utility?
- What are the Options for language?
- Why should I consider a Durable Power of Attorney?
- What are The Changes in Medicine?
- What are the Formative Cases?
- What do you mean by Doctrine of Obviousness/Double Patenting?
What's Your Answer to "Can you argue, when you make a change you refocus on language, so literal language better be good?"