Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > This is hilarious: > > http://www.jmri.org/k/docket/289.pdf [...] > Selected quotes:
"THE COURT: SO WHAT WOULD YOU PROPOSE? LET'S SAY WE ARE PAST THE POINT -- I'M NOT SAYING WE ARE, BUT LET'S ASSUME WE'RE PAST THE POINT OF WHETHER AN INJUNCTION SHOULD ISSUE, BECAUSE THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT SAID -- AND IT WASN'T A MODEL OF CLARITY IN ITS MANDATE: "WE'RE REMANDING IT TO THE DISTRICT COURT TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN INJUNCTION SHOULD ISSUE BASED UPON WHETHER THERE WAS A THREAT OF IRREPARABLE HARM," OR WHATEVER THE STANDARD WAS. IT DIDN'T SAY: WE'RE REMANDING TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE WAS INFRINGEMENT." THEY ASSUMED INFRINGEMENT BASED UPON THE EXISTING RECORD. AND THAT MAY BE AN ERRONEOUS FINDING, AND THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A REMEDY TO TAKE IT TO -- GOD KNOWS THEY REVERSED THEMSELVES ALMOST ON, YOU KNOW, A YEARLY BASIS. ONE PANEL SAYS SOMETHING, AND THEN THE REST OF THEM SAY IT'S NOT RIGHT." <chuckles> regards, alexander. -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
