Showing posts with label sale. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sale. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Its not garage sale season yet
Its not garage sale season yet
But I will be looking for a stand mixer! Look HERE! (Its at About.com - so forgive the pop-ups, K?) A DIY Ball WINDER!! Wooo Hooo!
I started on my Kiri shall. Its in lace-weight merino in a very light champagne/khaki color. I only have 5,000 yards of this, so I may over dye some of it. Kool Aid if I have too! I didnt get far enough for a progress shot, though.
It looks like DH and I will be cash poor/house rich in the coming months, so all yarn purchases will be double evaluated. All yarn must have a purpose, all purposes must be useful to whomever gets the finished item.
Yarn in Stash:
several balls of dishcloth cotton - dish/wash clothes for next Christmas
2 balls of finer cotton - the turkish stitch bag (1 ball each)
2 skeins of Axelles Water Lilies (sw merino) (see below) - depending on my Sockapalooza assignment may become socks for said or something for a neiceling
Cotton Ease - could be dresses for neicelings - hmmm
Fishermans wool - both dyed and one whole undyed. NO IDEAS!
5000 yrds lace-weight merino - Kiri until I cry?
I know that isnt a LOT by some standards, but it will keep me busy while I eat beans and cornbread for the next two months to get this mortgage under our belts.
So, pics tomorrow? I dont know just yet!
Available link for download
Thursday, March 30, 2017
Jury Finds ABI’s Sale of DNA Sequencing Reagents and Products Infringed Enzos Patent
Jury Finds ABI’s Sale of DNA Sequencing Reagents and Products Infringed Enzos Patent
On November 1, in the case of Enzo Biochem v. Applera (D. Conn. No. 04-00929), a jury found Applied Biosystems Incorporated (ABI) liable for directly infringing US Patent Number 5,449,767 by manufacturing and or selling reagent products used in DNA anaysis and sequencing. The jury also found ABI liable for inducing its customers to infringe the patent by selling DNA sequencing instruments and reagents. The jury found that ABIs infringement was not willful, but nonetheless awarded Enzo $48,587,500 in reasonable royalty damages.
The infringed patent claims certain chemical compounds useful as probes in DNA analysis, for example in DNA sequencing. The patent came out of research conducted in the Yale University laboratory of David Ward, and which the University exclusively licensed to Enzo. Initially, the District Court had on a motion for summary judgment ruled the patent invalid as anticipated by prior art, and indefinite based on the use of the claim language “covalently attached directly or through a linkage group that does not substantially interfere with the characteristic ability of the oligo- or polynucleotide to hybridize with a nucleic acid and does not substantially interfere with formation of the signalling moiety or detection of the detectable signal.”
However, in Enzo Biochem v. Applera, 599 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2010) the Federal Circuit reversed, holding that with respect to anticipation Enzo had raised a genuine issue of material fact sufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment, and with respect to indefiniteness that the challenged claim language is not indefinite, and more particularly that the terms "hybridize" and “not interfering substantially” are not indefinite. This decision gained a lot of attention, with many people taking the position that the functional language used in the claim did not adequately apprise the public of the scope of these claims directed towards chemical compounds. It was thought that this case might be a good vehicle for the en banc Federal Circuit, or even the Supreme Court, to clarify the standard for satisfying the indefiniteness requirement, and perhaps raise the bar.
However, the petition for en banc rehearing and certiorari were both denied, and the case was sent back to the District Court for the jury to assess the validity and infringement of the patent. The jury found the claims not only to be infringed, but also rejected the anticipation and other validity challenges to Enzos patent.
Available link for download
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)