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

06.10.18

Instead of Smearing the Judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Check Why Abstract Patents Are Being Granted in the First Place

Posted in America, Patents at 11:14 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Hours ago: Do Know Evil? Then Stop Patenting Software, Google

Judges as moral reasoners - Oxford Journals - Oxford University Press
Full paper: Judges as moral reasoners – Oxford Journals – Oxford University Press [PDF]

Summary: PTAB is taking a lot of heat (albeit always from patent maximalists) for simply applying the law, which ought to have been applied by the Office at the time of examination; confidence in US patents depends on the Office’s ability to discern/distinguish patentable subject matter from clearly unpatentable subject matter

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has made a few headlines this past week. Michael Loney, who is based in New York, took note of some precedential decisions:

The PTAB has de-designated Idle Free and Master Image in response to Aqua Products. Fiscal year 2018′s first half set a motion to amend record for two consecutive quarters

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has de-designated as precedential MasterImage 3D v RealD, Case IPR2015-00040 (PTAB July 15, 2015) (Paper 42) and has de-designated as informative Idle Free Sys v Bergstrom, Case IPR2012-00027 (June 11, 2013) (Paper 26).

Much of the coverage about PTAB, however, has been hostile. As expected, it came from longtime PTAB bashers and anti-PTAB sites. Those sites have a proven disdain for patent quality. Rather than ignore those sites we’d like to quickly respond to these.

Referring to a case from the first of June, Watchtroll now cherry-picks one of those rare cases where the Federal Circuit either overrules or vacates/remands after PTAB declares some patent/s to be invalid. Deception by omission in the patent trolls’ lobby? Well, this was done again yesterday. Watchtroll himself (Quinn) said: “The Office taking a proactive approach to reviewing cases on appeal to the Federal Circuit is good news for applicants facing Alice based 101 rejections. Obviously, now is not the time to allow those cases to go abandoned if they remain commercially relevant.”

“Watchtroll’s goal has always been to ‘scandalise’ the PTAB, trying to make it seems like it is making errors (in judgment) all the time when in fact it is getting things right — as measured by affirmations higher up — almost all the time.”Writing about patents in an entirely different domain, Watchtroll found an example of a patent’s validity being upheld, but readers must bear in mind that all the above are the exceptions rather than the norm. Watchtroll’s goal has always been to ‘scandalise’ the PTAB, trying to make it seems like it is making errors (in judgment) all the time when in fact it is getting things right — as measured by affirmations higher up — almost all the time. It’s not just Watchtroll by the way but also sites that have sunk to similarly low levels (a climate of jurist bashing and vicious personal attacks), even Patently-O. Some hours ago Watchtroll celebrated the lobbyist in chief, Makan Delrahim.

Writing about Andrew Hirshfeld, who nearly became a Director of the USPTO (based on rumours at one time), Stephen C. Glazier (Partner at Akerman LLP) relayed this “webinar” nonsense, organised by patent maximalists to better suit their agenda. Glazier uses Patently-O as his platform and speaks of “Increasing Certainty in US Patent Law,” which should not be a problem at all. If one cares about certainty, then one should instruct examiners to stop granting abstract patents altogether. Here’s what Hirshfeld is said to have said:

On April 26, 2018 the U.S. Patent Commissioner, Andrew Hirshfeld, spoke at our webinar regarding current developments at the U.S. Patent Office. [Link Below]

A major theme of Commissioner Hirshfeld’s remarks was the PTO’s revived focus on increasing reliability, certainty, and enforceability of issued patents and the application process. The underlying goal here is to further increase the value of patents and their beneficial impact on innovative products and businesses.

The Commissioner stated that a first step toward this policy goal will be pursued by new PTO guidance to Examiners and the applicants regarding the application of the Alice-Mayo test for patent subject matter eligibility under Section 101. Other possible PTO guidance is also being considered on various current issues.

Anticipat, which is trying to make money out of PTAB bashing, has stepped in to also mention “predictability”. “The recent memos offer some hope that USPTO will continue to improve the predictability of applying Section 101 rejections,” it said. How about just actually applying Section 101 consistently at examination time?

“…to improve the certainty/confidence (or “predictability”) of patents simply stop granting patents in defiance of Alice/Section 101.”The reason PTAB so often invalidates patents is simple; examiners grant patents that they should not be granting. It’s easier for these people to simply attack PTAB itself, not examiners who grant in a rush. Watchtroll himself (Quinn) is back to PTAB bashing (“Structural Bias at the PTAB: No Dissent Desired”). Been a while since the last time? These patent extremists have been reduced to tribunal bashing, judge bashing, and conspiracy theories (especially about Google).

The anti-PTAB (i.e. anti-patent quality) site Anticipat continues to stalk individual USPTO examiners, pretty much with the intention of maligning good ones (strict, thorough examination). To quote:

The USPTO has a vested interest in knowing how well its patent examiners examine applications. It tracks production, efficiency and quality. Even though quality examination has always been tricky to measure, one metric comes pretty close: an examiner’s appeal track record. And while tech center directors have had access to this data, until recently this has been difficult to access. Here we explore the known gaps of how this metric is being used at the USPTO.

According to sources at the USPTO, directors–who oversee each technology center–have access to their Examiners’ appeal track records. The more an Examiner gets affirmed by the PTAB on appeal, the more reasonable the Examiner’s rejections, the theory goes. This means that directors can evaluate examiners based on how often an examiner gets affirmed.

Let’s just say it again: to improve the certainty/confidence (or “predictability”) of patents simply stop granting patents in defiance of Alice/Section 101. That oughtn’t be so hard, right?

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

What Else is New


  1. Open Invention Network (OIN) Member Companies Need to Become Unanimous in Opposition to Software Patents

    Opposition to abstract software patents, which even the SCOTUS and the Federal Circuit nowadays reject, would be strategically smart for OIN; but instead it issues a statement in support of a GPL compliance initiative



  2. President Battistelli 'Killed' the EPO; António Campinos Will 'Finish the Job'

    The EPO is shrinking, but this is being shrewdly disguised using terms like "efficiency" and a low-profile President who keeps himself in the dark



  3. Links 14/8/2018: Virtlyst 1.2.0, Blender 2.8 Planning Update, Zorin OS 12.4, FreeBSD 12.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  4. Berkheimer Changed Nothing and Invalidation Rates of Abstract Software Patents Remain Very High

    Contrary to repetitive misinformation from firms that 'sell' services around patents, there is no turnaround or comeback for software patents; the latest numbers suggest a marginal difference at best — one that may be negligible considering the correlation between expected outcomes and actions (the nature of risk analysis)



  5. Lockton Insurance Brokers Exploiting Patent Trolls to Sell Insurance to the Gullible

    Demonstrating what some people have dubbed (and popularised) "disaster capitalism", Lockton now looks for opportunities to profit from patent trolls, in the form of "insurance" (the same thing Microsoft does)



  6. Patent Lawyers Writing Patent Law for Their Own Enrichment Rather Than for Innovation

    We have become detached from the original goals and come to the point where patent offices aren't necessarily run by people qualified for the job of advancing science and technology; they, unlike judges, only seem to care about how many patents get granted, irrespective of their quality/merit



  7. Links 13/8/2018: Linux 4.18 and GNU Linux-libre 4.18 Arrive

    Links for the day



  8. PTAB is Loathed by Patent Maximalists Because It Can Potentially Invalidate Thousands of Software Patents (More Than Courts Can Handle)

    The US patent system has become more resistant to software patents; courts, however, are still needed to invalidate such patents (a potentially expensive process) because the USPTO continues to grant these provided some fashionable buzzwords/hype waves are utilised (e.g. "facial recognition", "blockchain", "autonomous vehicles")



  9. Gene Quinn and 'Dallas Innovates' as Couriers of Agenda for Patent Trolls Like iPEL

    Failing to hide their real purpose and malicious agenda, sites whose real purpose is to promote a lot of patent litigation produce puff pieces, even for patently unethical trolls such as iPEL



  10. Software Patents, Secured by 'Smart' and 'Intelligent' Tricks, Help Microsoft and Others Bypass Alice/Section 101

    A look at the use of fashionable trends and buzzwords to acquire and pass around dubious software patents, then attempting to guard these from much-needed post-Alice scrutiny



  11. Keep Boston (and Massachusetts in General) From Becoming an Infestation Zone for Patent Litigation

    Boston, renowned for research and innovation, has become somewhat of a litigation hotbed; this jeopardises the state's attractiveness (except perhaps to lawyers)



  12. Links 12/8/2018: Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Mesa 18.1.6 Release Notice, New Linux Imminent

    Links for the day



  13. Thomas Massie's “Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act of 2018” (RALIA) Would Put the US Patent System in the Lions' (or Trolls') Mouth Again

    An anti-§ 101 and anti-PTAB bill from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) strives to remove quality control; but by handing the system back to patent trolls he and his proponents simply strive to create more business of litigation, at the expense of innovation



  14. EPO-Style Problem-Solution: Tackling Backlog by Granting Lots of Low-Quality (Bogus) European Patents, Causing a Surge in Troll/Frivolous Litigation

    The EPO's lack of interest in genuine patent quality (measuring "quality" in terms of speed, not actual quality) may mean nothing but a litigation epidemic; many of these lawsuits would be abusive, baseless; those harmed the most would be small businesses that cannot afford a legal defense and would rather settle with those who exploit questionable patents, notably patent trolls



  15. Links 11/8/2018: PGP Clean Room 1.0, Ring-KDE 3.0.0, Julia 1.0

    Links for the day



  16. Propaganda Sites of Patent Trolls and Litigators Have Quit Trying to Appear Impartial or Having Integrity

    The lobbying groups of patent trolls (which receive money from such trolls) carry on meddling in policy and altering perception that drives policy; we present some new examples



  17. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Still Try to Undermine Inter Partes Reviews (“IPRs”), Refusing to Accept Patent Quality

    The patent maximalists in the United States, seeing that the USPTO is moving away from patent maximalism, is desperate for a turnaround; prominent patent maximalists take it all out on PTAB



  18. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement is Paralysed, So Team UPC is Twisting Old News

    Paralysis of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) means that people are completely forgetting about its very existence; those standing to benefit from it (patent litigation firms) are therefore recycling and distorting old news



  19. Patents as Profiteering Opportunities for Law Firms Rather Than Drivers of Innovation for Productive Companies

    A sample of news from yesterday; the patent microcosm is still arguing about who pays attorneys’ fees (not whether these fees are justified) and is constantly complaining about the decline in patent litigation, which means fewer and lower attorneys’ fees (less work for them)



  20. Links 9/8/2018: Mesa 18.2 RC2, Cockpit 175, WPA-2 Hash Cracking

    Links for the day



  21. Patent Maximalists -- Not Reformers -- Are the Biggest Threat to the Viability of the Patent System and Innovation

    Those who strive to infinitely expand patent scope are rendering the patent system obsolete and completely losing sight of the very purpose of the patent system, whose sanity US courts and lawmakers gradually restore (one ruling and one bill at a time)



  22. WeMove.EU Tackles Low Patent Quality at the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The breadth of European Patents, which now cover even nature itself, worries public interest groups; Team UPC, however, wants patent scope to expand further and António Campinos has expressed his intention to further increase the number of grants



  23. Links 8/8/2018: KDE Neon for Testing, New LibreOffice Release, Dart 2.0

    Links for the day



  24. Links 7/8/2018: TCP Vulnerability in Linux, Speck Crypto Code Candidate for Removal

    Links for the day



  25. PTAB Needs to Expand and Become More Accessible to More Challengers of Wrongly-Granted Patents

    Challenges to US patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are helping to raise the bar for litigators; those who value the quality of patents should welcome rather than condemn PTAB and PTAB ought to be expanded to facilitate more scrutiny of granted patents



  26. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit Precedents Might Make District Courts (Outside Texas) More Sceptical of Patents

    As patent lawsuits scatter around the United States (not as concentrated around Texas anymore) there's a real chance of turnaround in terms of outcomes; we look at some recent cases



  27. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) is Cleaning Up the United States' Patent System

    The highest patent court (bar the US Supreme Court, SCOTUS) is rejecting a lot of patents, not only software patents; this is long overdue and is bad news to patent lawyers (not to companies that actually create and sell things)



  28. Racing to the Bottom, the António Campinos-Led EPO Continues to Promote Software Patents, Just Like China

    The EPO is being transformed into 'SIPO Europe', a dangerous gamble which would leave European firms more susceptible to frivolous litigation and generally reduce the value of previously-much-coveted European Patents



  29. Arista Shows How ITC Injustice (Embargo Before Facts Are Even Known) Harms Smaller Businesses, Helps Monopolists

    Arista Networks Inc. (Arista) has just given up, but only after years of legal bullying from Cisco, which imposed embargoes using questionable patents that should never have been granted by the USPTO



  30. Links 6/8/2018: Linux 4.18 RC8, Pinguy OS 18.04.1, Netrunner Rolling 2018.08, Thunderbird 60

    Links for the day


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