Rethinking Prosecution History Estoppel

Rethinking Prosecution History Estoppel

Under the rule of prosecution history estoppel, patent applicants who amend their claims during the course of patent prosecution assume a significant risk: the risk that a court will later construe the changes as concessions that should be read to limit patent scope. This risk is exacerbated by strong evidentiary presumptions under which courts are to assume, unless the patentee presents suffic...

Rethinking the social history.

R has established that social environments affect human health.1 Acknowledged social determinants of health — including racial or ethnic background, occupation, and the use of alcohol and tobacco2 — also influence the effectiveness of health care delivery.3 But other social factors, such as the ability to afford medications, access to transportation, available time, and competing priorities, ma...

Qabusnama of Persian Architecture: Rethinking the history of making Gunbad-i Qābus

This study aims to investigate the origins, concepts, and symbolic and formal functions of the Gunbad-i Qābus tomb-tower based on interpretation of its inscription.  This hermeneutic analysis addresses the historical context of the building formation, rethinking the concepts presented in its ten-piece inscription using philological methods, and compares it with the inscriptions of some other to...

Mutuality of Estoppel: Its Status in Nebraska

Reasonable Reliance in Estoppel by Conduct

The basis on which an estoppel by conduct is established is a keenly debated question. Theories based on promise and conscience have recently been propounded in the literature: Michael Pratt has argued that equitable estoppel must be based on promise,* 1 while Michael Spence has argued that the central criterion of estoppel by conduct is unconscionable conduct.2 In advancing these promise and c...