EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.07.18

PTAB Squashes Patent Trolls So the Patent Trolls’ Lobby is Attacking PTAB on a Daily Basis

Posted in America, Patents at 11:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Watchtroll even calls people who petition PTAB a “cartel”, having already called PTAB staff impotent

PTAB impotence

Summary: Ferocious attacks on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are intensifying because the Board is reaching all-time highs, which causes panic in circles that profit from low-quality (and typically invalid) patents

THE previous post noted that there are attacks on the appeal board (PTAB) of the USPTO. Those who are against patent quality always loathed PTAB. It’s not a surprise; it’s what we should expect.

A couple of days ago the patent of a troll (Leigh M. Rothschild) was said to be in trouble after a petition had been filed at PTAB. To quote Unified Patents:

On January 4, 2018, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted trial on all challenged claims in an IPR filed by Unified against U.S. Patent 8,799,088, owned and asserted by Rothschild Biometric Systems, LLC and SRR Patent Holdings, LLC, a Leigh M. Rothschild entity and well-known NPE. The ’088 Patent, directed to a system and method for verifying user identity information in financial transactions, was previously asserted in district court litigation against USAA Savings Bank.

There’s also this one from last month (against another troll, Uniloc):

On December 11, 2017, Unified filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against U.S. Patent 7,092,671 owned and asserted by Uniloc Luxembourg, S.A. and Uniloc USA (collectively “Uniloc”), a well-known NPE responsible for filing 95 new patent litigations since January 2017. The ’671 patent, directed to a “system where a user’s handheld computer could automatically dial a telephone number stored in its memory by interacting with a telephone” has been asserted in district court against Apple and Samsung.

It should be noted that PTAB often intercepts legal actions (or threats) from patent trolls, so it’s not surprising that foes of PTAB are typically trolls and their lawyers (sometimes the lawyers themselves are the trolls).

Apologists of trolls, such as this one, noted that “PTAB Denied IPR of a Patent that Had Been Challenged in 3 Prior IPRs with the Same Art!!: https://dlbjbjzgnk95t.cloudfront.net/0998000/998478/ipr2017-01780_institution_decision_8.pdf …”

So what? Maybe it’s just a very bad patent. No scandal here.

Another one wrote: “There should be a rule 11 equivalent remedy to respondents in instances where IPR is not instituted. Fees and costs should automatically shift.”

“More lawyers should be disbarred for pursuing bogus patents, e.g. software patents using loopholes, in the first place,” I told him. These people are doing anything they can to stop PTAB not because they support science and technology; they’re in the patent ‘industry’. PTAB is very disruptive to the patent ‘industry’.

How about patents on life? Ending this lunacy may take some time and PTAB seems like a step in the right direction:

Monsanto 1/5/2017. inter partes reexamination. U.S. Pat. No. 7,790,953 on “two step process for crossing (mating) two parent soybean lines to produce soybean seeds with a modified fatty acid profile.” HELD: claims anticipated or obvious.

There’s also this:

Monsanto v DuPont FedCir 1/5/18: 1st precedential patent dec’n of 2018! Circuit affirms PTAB’s inter partes reexam decision. M’s claims inherently anticipated based on prior art reference plus a non-prior declaration interpreting it. Claim 2 also obvious over same reference.

They’re fighting over patents on life.

Let’s remember that even large targets of PTAB petitions, such as Cisco, openly and broadly support PTAB. We recently wrote about this in relation to the Arista dispute, which involves PTAB and the ITC (the ITC basically refuses to respect/obey PTAB judgments). The latest on this case [1, 2] is now pertaining to copyrights, not just patents:

Software Freedom Conservancy is pleased to announce that it has joined GitHub, Mozilla Corporation, and Engine Advocacy, in an amicus brief for the Cisco v. Arista case. In the brief, we argue against extending copyright law unduly to ideas and functionality embodied in software — namely, that imitating command-line interfaces should not alone constitute copyright infringement.

The case, which Cisco appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, considers whether a defense called “scènes à faire” should allow Arista Networks, Inc. to create a command-line interface that operates similarly to an interface developed by Cisco Systems, Inc. The lower court found, in a jury trial, that the defense was appropriate. Now, Cisco challenges that finding as a legal matter in their appeal.

What’s noteworthy about Cisco v Arista is that here we have Cisco’s patents being challenged — and likely invalidated — by PTAB (after Arista filed a petition). And nevertheless Cisco supports PTAB. We can think of not a single large technology company that opposes PTAB. In fact, small technology companies also support PTAB.

So why the fuss over PTAB? Because of the patent ‘industry’, notably trolls and lawyers (overlapping occupations at times).

A few days ago Watchtroll was trying to influence the Supreme Court by commenting on Oil States (regarding patents being challenged in PTAB IPRs). It resorted to lunatic theories of the fringe right and said: “If the court departs from the fundamental issues of private property, separation of powers and due process concerning patents and inventions, it won’t be for lack of clear-eyed, prudential, principled thinking and direction readily at hand.”

Patents are not a “property”, PTAB is separated from examination, and there is due process (including potential appeal to the Federal Circuit). So this whole argument is nonsensical. Watchtroll is just trying to publish an anti-PTAB article almost every day. On the same day it also said: “I predict that the United States Supreme Court will find post grant procedures under the America Invents Act to be unconstitutional.”

No, it will not. Even the patent microcosm does not make such a prediction. It’s broadly expected that the very opposite will occur. Watchtroll is at the fringe again, disconnected with reality as long as it suits its agenda. The following day, Joseph Robinson & Robert Schaffer wrote another PTAB-bashing piece in Watchtroll. Watchtroll is just bashing PTAB almost every single day (sometimes more than once a day) and the arguments don’t add up. It also bashes HTIA, which supports PTAB on behalf of technology firms. Steve Brachmann is acting like Quinn’s paid liar. He wrote this: “Further, the HTIA critiques the notion that the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice has harmed the software industry by citing to data published by PwC which shows increased investment into software research & development in recent years.”

To claim that “Alice has harmed the software industry” is simply a lie. The very opposite is true, but Steve Brachmann is just a writer, so his knowledge in this domain is nonexistent. He just serves his (pay)masters. Here he is (yesterday) calling people who challenge the validity of some patents the “efficient infringer cartel”. What a toxic site. The “efficient infringer cartel’s use of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB),” he said.

Earlier today Watchtroll continued the PTAB bashing, this time courtesy of Josh Malone. So even on a Sunday Watchtroll attacks PTAB. Is this all they’ll produce in 2018?

Two days ago they wrote about a PTAB case that had been escalated to the higher court (CAFC) and obviously they emphasised Newman's dissent rather than the majority opinion. To quote:

On appeal Microsoft challenged the Board’s standard of review. The Federal Circuit reiterated that anticipation is a question of fact subject to substantial evidence review, that ultimate claim construction and claim construction relying solely on intrinsic evidence is subject to de novo review, and subsidiary factual findings based on extrinsic evidence are reviewed for substantial evidence.

[...]

Judge Newman dissented with the majority’s finding that the Kenoyer reference neither anticipated nor obviated the ‘182 patent. After performing a clause-by-clause review of claim 6, she argued that Figure 1 of Kenoyer discloses all of the elements of claim 6 and, thus, anticipates claim 6.

Further and in opposition to the majority’s view that Kenoyer presents “multiple, distinct teachings that the artisan might somehow combine to achieve the claimed invention,” she argued that the Kenoyer reference explicitly combines the limitations to provide the same conferencing system as in claim 6. Finally, she argued that the majority’s statement that “Microsoft fails to explain how a computer, especially the computer in Kenoyer, would receive broadcast, cable, or satellite television signals” was baseless because Biscotti does not provide an explanation and both Kenoyer and the ‘182 patent treat such signals as known technology.

The above serves to demonstrate that those who want to destroy PTAB have nothing to do with technology and everything to do with litigation. The pattern is very clear.

Here we have an aggressive law firm noting the increase in fees, which in turn makes PTAB less accessible, especially to small companies.

On January 16, 2018, the USPTO will increase its fees for inter partes reviews (IPR), post-grant reviews (PGR), and covered business method reviews (CBM). We updated Finnegan’s AIA Blog to reflect these new fees, which are also shown below. The base cost for an IPR increases from $23,000 to $30,500. Increases for PGR and CBM are more modest, but excess claims fees uniformly increase by 50% regardless of the proceeding type.

It certainly seems like USPTO Director Matal is trying to slow down PTAB. What’s needed is the very opposite; they need to expand this ‘court’, add staff to it, and make it more affordable in order to improve patent quality.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New


  1. Links 18/1/2018: MenuLibre 2.1.4, Git 2.16 Released

    Links for the day



  2. Microsoft, Masking/Hiding Itself Behind Patent Trolls, is Still Engaging in Patent Extortion

    A review of Microsoft's ugly tactics, which involve coercion and extortion (for businesses to move to Azure and/or for OEMs to preload Microsoft software) while Microsoft-connected patent trolls help hide the "enforcement" element in this whole racket



  3. Patent Prosecution Highway: Low-Quality Patents for High-Frequency Patent Aggressors

    The EPO's race to the bottom of patent quality, combined with a "need for speed", is a recipe for disaster (except for litigation firms, patent bullies, and patent trolls)



  4. Press Coverage About the EPO Board Revoking Broad's CRISPR Patent

    Even though there's some decent coverage about yesterday's decision (e.g. from The Scientist), the patent microcosm googlebombs the news with stuff that serves to distract from or distort the outcome



  5. Links 17/1/2018: HHVM 3.24, WordPress 4.9.2

    Links for the day



  6. No Patents on Life (CRISPR), Said EPO Boards of Appeal Just a Few Hours Ago

    Broad spectacularly loses its key case, which may soon mean that any other patents on CRISPR too will be considered invalid



  7. Only Two Weeks on the Job, Judge Patrick Corcoran is Already Being Threatened by EPO Management

    The attack on a technical judge who is accused of relaying information many people had already relayed anyway (it was gossip at the whole Organisation for years) carries on as he is again being pushed around, just as many people predicted



  8. EPO Board of Appeal Has an Opportunity to Stop Controversial Patents on Life

    Patent maximalism at the EPO can be pushed aback slightly if the European appeal board decides to curtail CRISPR patents in a matter of days



  9. Links 16/1/2018: More on Barcelona, OSI at 20

    Links for the day



  10. 2018 Will be an Even Worse Year for Software Patents Because the US Supreme Court Shields Alice

    The latest picks (reviewed cases) of the Supreme Court of the United States signal another year with little or no hope for the software patents lobby; PTAB too is expected to endure after a record-breaking year, in which it invalidated a lot of software patents that had been erroneously granted



  11. Patent Trolls (Euphemised as “Public IP Companies”) Are Dying in the United States, But the Trouble Isn't Over

    The demise of various types of patent trolls, including publicly-traded trolls, is good news; but we take stock of the latest developments in order to better assess the remaining threat



  12. EPO Management and Team UPC Carry on Lying About Unified Patent Court, Sinking to New Lows in the Process

    At a loss for words over the loss of the Unitary Patent, Team UPC and Team Battistelli now blatantly lie and even get together with professional liars such as Watchtroll



  13. China Tightens Its Knot of Restrictive Rules and Patents

    Overzealous patent aggressors and patent trolls in China, in addition to an explosion in low-quality patents, may simply discourage companies from doing production/manufacturing there



  14. Microsoft's Patent Racket Has Just Been Broadened to Threaten GNU/Linux Users Who Don't Pay Microsoft 'Rents'

    Microsoft revisits its aggressive patent strategy which it failed to properly implement 12 years ago with Novell; it wants to 'collect' a patent tax on GNU/Linux and it uses patent trolls to make that easier



  15. EPO Scandals Played a Considerable Role in Sinking the Unified Patent Court (UPC)

    Today's press coverage about the UPC reinforces the idea that the EPO saga, culminating in despicable attacks on Patrick Corcoran (a judge), may doom the UPC once and for all (unless one believes Team UPC)



  16. J Nicholas Gross Thinks Professors Stop Being Professors If They're Not Patent Extremists Like Him

    The below-the-belt tactics of patent trolls and their allies show no signs of abatement and their tone reveals growing irritation and frustration (inability to sue and extort companies as easily as they used to)



  17. The US Supreme Court Has Just Denied Another Chance to Deal With a Case Similar to Alice (Potentially Impacting § 101)

    There is no sign that software patents will be rendered worthwhile any time in the near future, but proponents of software patents don't give up



  18. Litigation Roundup: Nintendo, TiVo, Apple, Samsung, Huawei, Philips, UMC

    The latest high-profile legal battles, spanning a growing number of nations and increasingly representing a political shift as well



  19. Roundup of Patent News From Canada, South America and Australia

    A few bits and pieces of news from around the world, serving to highlight patent trends in parts of the world where the patent offices haven't much international clout/impact



  20. Links 15/1/2018: Linux 4.15 RC8, Wine 3.0 RC6

    Links for the day



  21. PTAB is Being Demeaned, But Only by the Very Entities One Ought to Expect (Because They Hate Patent Justice/Quality)

    The latest rants/scorn against PTAB -- leaning on cases such as Wi-Fi One v Broadcom or entities like Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, Apple etc. -- are all coming from firms and people who profit from low-quality patents



  22. If Ericsson and Its Patent Trolls (Like Avanci and Unwired Planet) Cannot Make It, the Patent Microcosm Will Perish

    The demise of patent-asserting/patent assertion business models (trolling or enforcement by proxy) may see front groups/media supportive of it diminishing as well; this appears to be happening already



  23. European Patent Office Causes Physical Harm to Employees, Then Fires Them

    Another one (among many) EPO documents about the alarming physical wellbeing of EPO employees and the management’s attitude towards the issue



  24. Battistelli Was Always (Right From the Start and Since Candidacy) All About Money

    “I have always admired creative people, inventors, those who, through their passion and their work, bring about scientific progress or artistic evolution. I was not blessed with such talent myself,” explained the EPO‘s President when pursuing his current job (for which he was barely qualified and probably not eligible because of his political work)



  25. “Under the Intergovernmental EPC System It is Difficult to Speak of a Functional Separation of Powers”

    An illustration of the glaring deficiency that now prevails and cannot be tolerated as long as the goal is to ensure democratic functionality; absence of the role of Separation of Powers (or Rule of Law) at the EPO is evident now that Battistelli not only controls the Council (using EPO budget) but also blatantly attacks the independence of the Boards of Appeal



  26. The Patent Microcosm Thinks It's Wonderful That IP3 is Selling Stupid Patents, Ignores Far More Important News

    IP3, which we've always considered to be nothing but a parasite, does what it does best and those who love stupid patents consider it to be some sort of victory



  27. Automotives, Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things and Industry 4.0 Among the Buzz Terms Used to Bypass Alice and the EPC Nowadays

    In order to make prior art search a lot harder and in order to make software patents look legitimate (even in various courtrooms) the patent microcosm and greedy patent offices embrace buzzwords



  28. Blockchain Becomes the Target Not Only of Financial Institutions With Software Patents But Also Trolls

    Blockchain software, which is growing in importance and has become ubiquitous in various domains other than finance, is perceived as an opportunity for disruption and also patent litigation; CNBC continues to publish puff pieces for Erich Spangenberg (amid stockpiling of such patents)



  29. EPC Foresaw the Administrative Council Overseeing the Patent Office, Jesper Kongstad Made It “Working Together”

    An old open letter from the EPO shows the famous moment when Jesper Kongstad and Battistelli came up with a plan to empower both, rendering the Administrative Council almost subservient to the Office (complete inversion of the desired topology)



  30. 2010: Blaming the Messenger (SUEPO) for Staff Unhappiness at the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Tactics of SUEPO (EPO union) blaming go further back than Battistelli and can be found in the previous administration as well


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts