Inc. v. Mitsubishi Corp., 215 F.3d 1246, 1255 (Fed.Cir.2000). Defendants cite to a district court decision in which the court concluded that it was: reluctant to conclude that these web advertisements are sufficient, in and of themselves, to constitute an offer to sell, because they do not contain pricing information and/or other ordering information. See Biomedics, LLC v. New Womyn, Inc., 112 F.Supp.2d 869, 873 (E.D.Mo.2000) (concluding that web site ads were an offer to sell within the meaning of Section 271(a), where web site contained pricing information, request form for web site visitor to request additional information on product and independent sales representative locator); VP Intellectual Properties, LLC v. IMTEC Corporation, 1999 WL 1125204, *5-6 (D.N.J. Dec. 9, 1999) (<HOLDING>); Intel Corporation v. Silicon Storage Tech.
holding that an internet site containing product descriptions but no pricing information is not an offer to sell holding that an offer to donate cannot be an offer to sell holding that posting defamatory information on the internet is not sufficient to subject the poster to jurisdiction in each state in which the information is accessed holding that mere advertisements which are directed at a national audience and contain no pricing information are insufficient in and of themselves to constitute an offer to sell holding that an offer to compromise is generally not admissible as an admission