Xref: utzoo sci.crypt:4880 gnu.misc.discuss:3223 comp.org.eff.talk:2439
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,gnu.misc.discuss,comp.org.eff.talk
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ptownson
From: ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu (Patrick A. Townson)
Subject: Re: bizarre question...
Message-ID: <1991May24.041906.3787@eecs.nwu.edu>
Keywords: RSA patent rpem
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
References: <1991May16.201709.3086@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <1991May23.032146.10692@eecs.nwu.edu> <14880@ulysses.att.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 1991 04:19:06 GMT


In article <14880@ulysses.att.com> smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven
Bellovin) writes:

> I'm not a lawyer, but...  Here's the wording of the 7th Amendment to
> the U.S. Constitution:

>	In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed
>	twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no
>	fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the
>	United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

> Since patents are a matter of Federal law, this amendment presumably applies.
> (Besides, in my discussions with a patent lawyer he repeatedly stressed
> that it could be a jury trial if it ever came to that.)

But I am not (assuming I was the one suing him) asking for money,
other than of course my attorney fees and expenses, which are NOT
counted in the 'twenty dollar rule' ... 

I am merely asking the judge to order him to refrain from continuing
to engage in the behavior which brought him there in the first place.

I do think that since there is no 'amount of money in dispute' we must
both mutually agree upon a jury trial. 


PAT