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
    Patentman, 30 Dec 2005 @ 4:26pm

    Re: ridiculous

    "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."

    When did I ever say I wanted to keep industry experts out? I want you to explain your system beyond simply stating one sentence. I ask again, How do you prove something without prior art? Actually now that I think about it, what exactly do you think prior art is? That might help clarify things.

    As for the rest being sarcastic, some of it was, some of it was not. You can seriously find an expert to say just about anything you want. That said, I don;t know how you could get around your experts being biased in some way? Please explain that to me. (This is not sarcastic, I seriously want you to explain your reasoning to me).

    "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."

    How? Please explain. Its a simple question. How do you provide proof of where the art is progressing, without prior art?

    "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"

    This only works if the people you query have no knowledge of the claimed invention or the patent application, else your panel would be intolerably tainted by hindsight. Will you at least concede that? Assuming that you have an unbiased panel that is ignorant of the problem, the question then becomes how do you pose the problem to these experts without giving away the solution? Please explain.

    No sarcasm, just questions. Explain your position. you've obviously put some thought into this, lets chat about it.

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
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

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