﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title>Intellectual Property Matters: Recent Comments</title>
	<updated>2010-03-14T07:20:06Z</updated>
	<id>http://ipmatters.iplawblog.net/comments/atom.aspx</id>
	<link href="http://ipmatters.iplawblog.net/comments/atom.aspx" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link href="http://ipmatters.iplawblog.net" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<generator uri="http://app.onlinequickblog.com/" version="2.0">Quick Blogcast</generator>
	<entry>
		<title>Comment on Federal Circuit: Capability of performing in infringing manner is not necessarily direct infringement.</title>
		<link href="http://ipmatters.iplawblog.net/2009/02/10/federal-circuit-capability-of-performing-in-infringing-manner-is-not-necessarily-direct-infringement.aspx#comment-1853823" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<id>tag:ipmatters.iplawblog.net,2009-02-26:1853823</id>
		<author>
			<name>James Myers</name>
		</author>
		<updated>2009-02-26T20:39:19Z</updated>
		<published>2009-02-26T20:39:19Z</published>
		<content type="html">I'm looking for cases, treatises, etc., which apply similar reasoning to method patent claims--capability to perform a method is not direct infringement.  Any help would be appreciated.</content>
	</entry>
</feed>