tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post2356398358126482359..comments2023-11-05T06:06:12.057-06:00Comments on The 271 Patent Blog: One Method Feature in Apparatus Claim Destroys ValidityTwo-Seventy-One Patent Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02481083706071978817noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-25368179088085713292009-09-04T15:47:43.412-05:002009-09-04T15:47:43.412-05:00"And the allowance of the claim was a mistake..."And the allowance of the claim was a mistake that is a result of the careless examination practices of your profession and cause your brethren to intentionally allow such nonsense."<br /><br />I agree. <br /><br />On the other hand, wouldn't it be awesome if they had the foresight to allow it just so it would result in this fiasco? <br /><br />Examiners don't "know" this kind of "lawl". Or at least very few do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-58055687895407609062009-09-04T15:45:06.627-05:002009-09-04T15:45:06.627-05:00"It is very common to draft a method claim an..."It is very common to draft a method claim and turn it into means claims by merely rewording the action term into means for and leaving the rest of the claim the same."<br /><br />Funny enough that's kinda what I was thinking might have happened. <br /><br />That bs needs to stop. And here is as good a reason as any for it to. <br /><br />6Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-15229360491229435742009-09-04T08:17:21.486-05:002009-09-04T08:17:21.486-05:00"It isn't a mistake, it is a result of th..."It isn't a mistake, it is a result of the careless drafting practices that pervade your profession at the moment and cause your brethern to intentionally submit such nonsense."<br /><br />And the allowance of the claim was a mistake that is a result of the careless examination practices of your profession and cause your brethren to intentionally allow such nonsense.<br /><br />If you think drafting claims is so easy, feel free to abandon the comfy confines of yo' gubment job and come on out into the real world.<br /><br />You know what they say: those who can...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-32022519092816356822009-09-03T13:42:09.498-05:002009-09-03T13:42:09.498-05:00"transmitting means"
No it didn't -..."transmitting means"<br /><br />No it didn't - see claims 7 and 8 which recites, "said transmitting section". So obviously the drafting mistake was not as clear as you thought. :-)<br /><br />When a patent has an error, there are legal avenues to correct it... rather than trying to assert a patent with an error.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-64513926701625814082009-09-03T10:37:38.617-05:002009-09-03T10:37:38.617-05:00This was an obvious drafting mistake "transmi...This was an obvious drafting mistake "transmitting the trellis encoded frames" clearly was mean to be "transmitting means for transmitting the trellis encoded frames".<br /><br />It is very common to draft a method claim and turn it into means claims by merely rewording the action term into means for and leaving the rest of the claim the same. I'm sure a review of all the filed claim would show such a pattern.<br /><br />The inventor should have had affidavits subimitted (or testimony presented) from patent drafters as to how patent claims are written.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-21370474983527867372009-09-03T07:37:10.815-05:002009-09-03T07:37:10.815-05:00P.S. A good (quick, cheap) way to determine if a ...P.S. A good (quick, cheap) way to determine if a claim error is just a "mistake" which can be corrected without reissue/reexam: can it be corrected by Certificate of Correction? If yes, that's prima facie evidence of a mistake that does not impact claim validity (and the claim will thereafter be construed in light of the Certificate of Correction without penalty). Attorneys have been known to try to change claim scope (or material claim errors) by CoC - but the PTO has agency guidelines in place to prevent such material changes by CoC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-47075048598525659272009-09-03T07:16:43.163-05:002009-09-03T07:16:43.163-05:006 sounds like our President when he learns somethi...6 sounds like our President when he learns something new, "Like I've always said... blah, blah."<br /><br />Well, at least he has learned this one thing, even if he is a little later than most. He is correct. And a mistake in the claims (like this) means the claims are invalid under 35 USC 112 any way you slice it.<br /><br />(Attorneys who rely on the presumption of validity to rectify their claim mistakes are like the managers of GM who rely on bailouts - if you can't produce, posture!)<br /><br />Careless claim drafting, and careless allowance - the epitome of a large segment of the patent system in the U.S. today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-3357827240386841062009-09-02T13:32:30.610-05:002009-09-02T13:32:30.610-05:00That "mistake" shows up all the time lat...That "mistake" shows up all the time lately. What do you not get about that? <br /><br />It isn't a mistake, it is a result of the careless drafting practices that pervade your profession at the moment and cause your brethern to intentionally submit such nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-56379733453518012512009-09-02T11:33:48.040-05:002009-09-02T11:33:48.040-05:00It was clearly a mistake in the claims. What do y...It was clearly a mistake in the claims. What do you not get about that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851300.post-14250687799856685652009-09-02T11:09:12.168-05:002009-09-02T11:09:12.168-05:00I've been saying and saying and saying "d...I've been saying and saying and saying "do not mix your claim types".6https://www.blogger.com/profile/06314011528630713737noreply@blogger.com