(Total Views: 553)
Posted On: 06/05/2018 3:15:15 PM
Post# of 82686
Read the Internal Operating Procedures of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/fi...aster2.pdf
"Consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 34 and Fed. Cir. R. 34, it is the court’s policy to allow oral argument unless :
(a) The appeal is frivolous; or
(b) The dispositive issue or set of issues recently has been authoritatively decided ;
or
(c) The facts and legal arguments are presented adequately in the briefs and record, and the decisional process would not be aided significantly by oral argument."
Here's why I think oral arguments won't likely happen. What is more authoritative than a S.C.O.T.U.S. decision? Here's the connection for newbies.
The S.C.O.T.U.S. made rulings in April 2018 , that IMO validated the PTAB and USPTO which had earlier validated the patents of SFOR (Strikeforce Technologies) in October 2017
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/fi...aster2.pdf
"Consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 34 and Fed. Cir. R. 34, it is the court’s policy to allow oral argument unless :
(a) The appeal is frivolous; or
(b) The dispositive issue or set of issues recently has been authoritatively decided ;
or
(c) The facts and legal arguments are presented adequately in the briefs and record, and the decisional process would not be aided significantly by oral argument."
Here's why I think oral arguments won't likely happen. What is more authoritative than a S.C.O.T.U.S. decision? Here's the connection for newbies.
The S.C.O.T.U.S. made rulings in April 2018 , that IMO validated the PTAB and USPTO which had earlier validated the patents of SFOR (Strikeforce Technologies) in October 2017
(13)
(0)
There are no guarantees in investing. No one should consider these pages or posts to be financial advice. Everyone has a responsibility to verify and thoroughly learn more than what is referenced or written here, and everyone must take responsibility for their own investing decisions.
