His patent attempt has been rejected three different times for obviousness. Rather than re-write the claim to get past the prior art, He (or his lawyer) argue that, and i quote, "no suggestion to combine the references." What made that even more amusing beyond the incompetence of that argument is that the prior art cited actually disclosed that something similar to the second piece of cited prior art may be used.
While I am not a lawyer, I have been involved in the patent process for several years now. His attempt to get his patent through is laughable and most likely futile. hmmm, just like his bitcoin gambit.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by mantoast.
Re:
His patent attempt has been rejected three different times for obviousness. Rather than re-write the claim to get past the prior art, He (or his lawyer) argue that, and i quote, "no suggestion to combine the references." What made that even more amusing beyond the incompetence of that argument is that the prior art cited actually disclosed that something similar to the second piece of cited prior art may be used.
While I am not a lawyer, I have been involved in the patent process for several years now. His attempt to get his patent through is laughable and most likely futile. hmmm, just like his bitcoin gambit.