Patently-O Bits and Bytes

by Dennis Crouch

New Jobs posted in Patently-O Jobs. Target your hiring with Patently-O.

21 thoughts on “Patently-O Bits and Bytes

  1. Just wondering why Patently-O rarely lists any in-house positions. The majority of listed positions are with law firms…

    And, we all love the 2000 billable hours in prep & pros…don’t we?

  2. Soverain Software LLC’s invalid “shopping cart” claims were issue precluded out of existence by the CAFC today.

    Soverein Software LLC v Victoria’s Secret

    link to cafc.uscourts.gov

    Soverain argues that issue preclusion should not apply because claim 39 was not previously found obvious and does not present identical issues. Complete identity of claims is not required to satisfy the identity-of-issues requirement for claim preclusion. Ohio Willow Wood, 735 F.3d at 1342; see Aspex, 672 F.3d at 1341 (in the claim Preclusion context). “If the differences between the unadjudicated
    patent claims and adjudicated patent claims do not materially alter the question of invalidity, collateral estoppel applies.” Ohio Willow Wood, 735 F.3d at 1342 (citing Bourns, Inc. v. United States, 537 F.2d 486, 493 (Ct. Cl. 1976)).

    The additional limitation here—transmitting a hypertext statement over the Internet, rather than over a generic network—does not materially alter the question of the validity of claim 39. In Newegg, as to the hypertext statement claims, the court noted that Newegg’s expert Tittel had testified that CompuServe was not on the Internet. Newegg, 705 F.3d at 1343. We explained that, as conceded by Soverain’s expert Shamos, the patentee “did not invent the Internet, or hypertext, or the URL.” Id. at 1344 (citing Shamos testimony). “[T]he use of hypertext to [perform the limitations of the hypertext statement claims] was a routine incorporation of Internet technology into existing processes.” Id. (citations omitted). Here, too, the routine incorporation of Internet technology in claim does not change the invalidity analysis.

    The Federal Circuit, the PTO, and district court’s everywhere would be wise to remember the basic rule. Limitations relating to the “Internet” or “over a network” or “on a computer” or “on a mobile device” or “on a wrist-worn device” aren’t meaningful in 2015. They haven’t been meaningful for a long, long time, just as limitations regarding “with a pencil” or “with a phone” add nothing to an otherwise unpatentable communication process.

    Congrats to Newegg and Victoria’s Secret for not putting up with Soverain’s baloney.

    1. More propaganda brought to you by the gistman. Sorry, MM, but your hijacking of the thread and propaganda is again nonsense.

      Sorry but information processing is here and isn’t going away.

      1. information processing is here and isn’t going away.

        Great slogan.

        Too bad that patent protection for information processing “innovations” is going to keep shrinking until, with a quiet whisper, it’ll be gone.

        Watch and see.

        And yes a certain group of entitled old timers will complain. They always do. Thankfully they too will vanish, like the dinosaurs they are.

        1. The Oracle has Spoken (in a thread about “bits and bytes”, no less). And so let it be. Irrelevance reigns supreme.

        2. What I think we are going to see is information processing becoming more and more relevant in our society and as it does the more ridiculous statements from the SCOTUS will seem. They will eventually be shamed into reversing Benson and Alice.

            1. Please share some of Greg’s “wisdom” on the subject of the “Royal Nine.” It’s Friday and I could use the laughs.

              Last time I checked Greg was still confused about Prometheus v. Mayo, or pretending to be. That says a lot about Greg. Of course, if he’d like to be educated on that topic, hanging out with Hal Wegner in Florida is probably going to be a big waste of time.

              1. His words then on the scathing:

                How bad are things? This is the first taking-conference-notes where for the most part, I don’t add my criticisms/sarcasms to make it honest. Nothing I could add would be any worse than what was said.

                And who then, was doing this “saying?”

                Fair question.

                My read of his email provides the following people (note: this is not to say that all of these people were scathing the a Royal Nine):

                David Kappos
                Robert Armitage
                Hal Wegner
                Andrew Baluch
                Warren Woessner
                Meredith (?)
                Stephen Kunin
                Todd D1ck1nson
                Robert Stoll

                Not sure why you or someone with your views was not invited.

                Maybe you can look into that.

        3. MM>>for information processing “innovations”

          Like the ones that are projected to be more capable than people in the next 20 years? Or the ones that are projected by the DOL to replace 10’s of millions of information workers? Like those “innovations” that your science illiterate SCOTUS says are abstractions?

          1. Like the ones that are projected to be more capable than people in the next 20 years? Or the ones that are projected by the DOL to replace 10’s of millions of information workers? Like those “innovations” that your science illiterate SCOTUS says are abstractions?

            Maybe someday you’ll learn how to distinguish between a particular object that exists in the real world and a patent claim that describes a class of objects based on the “new” information stored, received, transmitted or “processed” with the assistance of that object.

            But I doubt it.

            So keep digging! Always fun to watch. Meanwhile, the streamroller of history and actual progress in the legal “arts” is going to run right over you (again).

  3. So, if I apply for the job in Riyadh, will I be precluded from getting it because I’ve been in Israel, or because I have an Israeli passport? If I get the job, will I be allowed to engage in Jewish religious practice in Riyadh? If not, would the answer be different if I were a Christian?

    1. I don’t think they distinguish much between Christians and Jews from what I’ve heard. Both (I am at least one of these) are way out there….

  4. Why is the system “broken” because one idiot celebrity threatens someone with copyright infringement? And how could we “correct” the “broken” system?

  5. Re the Left Shark threats, one of the early comments at Sprigman’s blog notes:

    A minimally intelligent person can spent 10 minutes online and zero dollars and conclude that a legal threat like this will damage her reputation.

    Right. But this is Katy Perry we’re talking about.

    wonder if someone tried to patent the “data structure” describing the 3-D printer information for the shark costume. I hope so! Then we have some real fun times to look forward to. [In that regard, I’m always interested in any efforts to obtain protection for such files and any examples of PTO incompetence where such claims were granted].

    The attorney who received the threat is doing what every attorney receiving a baseless threat should do: explain why the threat is baseless and then publicize the threat to generate as much awareness as possible. The public needs to know how the broken system is being abused and exploited and who’s responsible.

    1. If you want a soapbox to broadcast your opinions, why don’t you start your own blog, instead of adding noise to this one?

      1. I’d say something about h1jacking threads, but that type of comment gets censored – while the dross here runs rampant.

        What did Anon2 say the other day…?

        1. I’d say something about h1jacking threads

          I’d love to hear it, given that absolutely nothing has been “h1jacked” by me.

          Keep crying. There’s a drought in the West and we can use the water.

      2. If you want a soapbox to broadcast your opinions, why don’t you start your own blog, instead of adding noise to this one?

        Do you need a kleenex to dry your snot and tears or will you just grab the hem of your mommy’s dress as usual?

Comments are closed.