<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bowman v. Monsanto Oral Argument Recap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2013/02/19/bowman-v-monsanto-oral-argument-recap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2013/02/19/bowman-v-monsanto-oral-argument-recap/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 21:56:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: IP Osgoode &#187; Bowman v. Monsanto and Patent Exhaustion: To Be, or Ought to Be?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2013/02/19/bowman-v-monsanto-oral-argument-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-111080</link>
		<dc:creator>IP Osgoode &#187; Bowman v. Monsanto and Patent Exhaustion: To Be, or Ought to Be?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/?p=3493#comment-111080</guid>
		<description>[...] most if not all accounts of the well-covered February 19th hearing (transcript)(audio)(post-hearing counsel discussion), the Court showed little sympathy for [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] most if not all accounts of the well-covered February 19th hearing (transcript)(audio)(post-hearing counsel discussion), the Court showed little sympathy for [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Farmer Climbs Soybean Stalk to the Supreme Court &#124; JETLaw: Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment &#38; Technology Law</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2013/02/19/bowman-v-monsanto-oral-argument-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-110567</link>
		<dc:creator>A Farmer Climbs Soybean Stalk to the Supreme Court &#124; JETLaw: Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment &#38; Technology Law</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:03:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/?p=3493#comment-110567</guid>
		<description>[...] Monsanto&#8217;s lawyer was allowed to talk uninterrupted for long stretches.  One commentator suggested that Bowman&#8217;s lawyer had a bad day and that it appeared that the Court was looking for a way [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Monsanto&#8217;s lawyer was allowed to talk uninterrupted for long stretches.  One commentator suggested that Bowman&#8217;s lawyer had a bad day and that it appeared that the Court was looking for a way [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
