Law Students Fend Off a Patent Troll

Re:Law Students Fend Off a Patent Troll by emptywindow on Tuesday August 12, 2014 @07:24PM (#8170727)

THESE PEOPLE DESERVE CREDIT:

- Prof. Jonathan Askin - @jaskin - runs the clinic, and trusted us to try this experiment.

- Maegan Fuller - @mafuller21 - did the lion's share of research and writing. Brilliant and dedicated student. She just took the bar exam.

- Jorge Torres - @jorgemtorres - Guy who actually knows patent litigation. Too bad he dropped out of law to be a VC. Pitch him :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Law Students Fend Off a Patent Troll by keithpeter on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @05:10AM (#8172056)

The judge crossed out the 'with' and wrote in 'without' prejudice on the note.

Does that mean that if the troll tries this on with someone else, this case can't be cited? Just wondering.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Law Students Fend Off a Patent Troll by toong on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @05:19AM (#8172092)

I guess not: the troll dropped the case, there was no judicial decision, so there is nothing to cite ?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Law Students Fend Off a Patent Troll by lutusp on Wednesday August 13, 2014 @05:30AM (#8172115)

No, in general the with/without prejudice language in legal rulings means that a reshaped and resubmitted case on the same issues wouldn't/would be welcomed back for another hearing.

[ Parent | on HN ]