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. icon
    Mike (profile), 30 Dec 2005 @ 4:12pm

    Re: ridiculous

    Ah, and now who is resorting to personal attacks?

    Hmm. No, that wasn't a personal attack. That was a clear statement. You admitted that you couldn't come up with a better way, and then concluded that none could exist. I pointed out that you weren't the final arbiter of ways things could be done, and that maybe some others could come up with a better system.

    As for the rest of your comment, I'm guessing it's sarcasm, so I'm not sure what you want me to say. First you say I'm useless because I don't present any recommendations. Then I give you plenty of recommendations and you mock me? Sorry man.

    My point was that there are ways to design a peer review system that works better than what we have now. Peers who are working in the industry obviously have a much better sense of what's obvious to the skilled practitioner, and yet you want to keep them out. As for how you show the state of the art, you can clearly show the progression in the field, and how it points towards what the patent defines. Or you could simply state the problem and see if others in the field can also come up with solutions -- again, suggesting that the invention isn't non-obvious.

    There are plenty of ways to make the system better. Why are you so resistant to them?

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
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.