Hacker News Reader

Comment by daveguy | Hacker News Reader

Except look at vegetish's post. It was rejected as obvious with a notice of final rejection. And they fought it tooth and nail to get it pushed through regardless of that rejection.

Hopefully that at least means it will be easy to overturn if they try to enforce the patent.

View on HN

“Final” rejections are poorly named. All they really indicate is that you will probably have to submit a request for continued examination—-and pay a hefty fee—-to continue. Ironically, a lengthy and contentious application process can make the patent more difficult to challenge later, in a more sophisticated setting, because the presumption that the patent is valid is the strongest with prior art that the examiner “considered.” (IAALBNYL)

(Shrug) They had the option to do the right thing and maintain their final rejection. So why didn't they?

It's hard to escape the conclusion that they just couldn't be bothered.

Agreed. The fact they were allowed to resumbit such a broad patent with obvious prior art is ridiculous.

They amended the claims which required the examiner to do another search.

As mentioned above, Final Rejection just means you have to pay more money to continue the patent prosecution. This is called a Request for Continued Examination. RCEs are common.

Generally, the initial filing fees provide for two rounds of examination -- a non-final rejection and then a final rejection.

If the applicant re-filed the same claims that were rejected in the final rejection (w/o amending them), the examiner can issue an immediate final rejection on a subsequent RCE if he disagrees with the argument the applicant might have supplied.

The last amendment to the claims narrowed them to the extent that the patent is useless. The examiner knew this and allowed the patent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com