Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick




NTP Trying To Drag Out The Patent Rejection Process? Wonder Why...

from the hmm dept

Last week the US Patent Office took the surprising step of reaching out and calling both RIM and NTP to let them know that it's very, very likely to reject all of NTP's patents at the heart of the excruciatingly long patent battle with RIM. This was extremely important because the judge in the patent lawsuit had said that he wouldn't wait for the Patent Office's ruling, mainly because he was sick of dealing with the case (who knew that impatience was a reasonable reason for ignoring important evidence and pushing a billion dollar fine?). So, now, the two parallel timelines become much more important. The companies are supposed to file documents with the court by February 1, 2006 -- and the judge is expected to rule soon afterwards. As for the patent review process, NTP was supposed to get its response in by the end of this month, but has managed to squeeze out a 30-day extension meaning it won't have to file the response until the nearly the same date as when the judge will make his decision. While NTP denies it's dragging out the process, it's clearly in the company's interest to do so. Still, we wonder how the judge can, in good conscience, still move forward with the case when the Patent Office has clearly stated that it believes it made a huge mistake in originally granting these patents. Meanwhile, it still seems like a reasonable question as to whether RIM can sue the Patent Office for its admitted negligence in issuing these patents (though, of course, they might want to wait until the patents are really rejected).

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Mousky, 30 Dec 2005 @ 10:02am

    Re: ridiculous

    Hmmm, I was under the impression that most patent lawyers work on a contingency fee basis - not being paid until the case is won. So in reality, some clients are not paying for their lawyers anything until the case is done. I am confused, in an earlier post, you said:

    "This is in large part due to the fact that it is impossible to predict value of any particular development in technology with any degree of accuracy"

    But now you argue that the "value of the asset at issue...is very high"? Well, either it is difficult or it is not difficult to predict the value an IP asset? Or do you just use whatever argument supports the point you are trying to make?

    "If you actually knoew how much work and care went into this stuff you would realize patent lawyers are actually grossly underpaid."

    ROTFL. You have got to be kidding. I thought we were having a civilized and informative discussion, then you bring this up. Patent lawyers are paid what the market thinks they are worth. I'm sure there are some teachers and social workers that would like to talk to you about being grossly underpaid.


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.