NEWS FLASH!!! Or maybe I should say: BIG MISTAKE F
Post# of 82686
(Total Views: 528)
Posted On: 05/09/2018 9:20:55 AM
NEWS FLASH!!! Or maybe I should say: BIG MISTAKE FLASH!!!
According to SecureAuth, Ropes & Gray mistakenly decided last year to represent SFOR Patents due to the fact that OOBA is an age old (and Children's School) idea BEFORE computers!
One MAJOR problem SecureAuth!!!
You missed several VERY significant facts:
1. First and foremost: YOU ADMIT below that SFOR WAS THE FIRST to "describe the OOBA idea in connection with computers!"
Ropes and Gray proudly stated THE SAME POINT as well to the Judges! Additionally, last year, the PTAB RULED that it DEFINITELY MATTERS that OOBA is a PATENT PROCESS of SFOR's!!
58 - In reality, out-of-band authentication is an old idea that was used long before computers. That StrikeForce was purportedly the first to describe the idea in combination with the computer components recited in its claims is not inventive; it is merely “generic computer implementation.” Indeed, combining an abstract idea with conventional computer components does not satisfy § 101, even if the resulting combination is new. Thus, StrikeForce’s alleged distinctions over the prior art fail to establish an inventive concept. As a result, StrikeForce’s claims are invalid under §Alice 101.
The PTAB wholly disagrees with you SecureAuth! They never mentioned school children. They also never mentioned ancient Greece or WWII. They did, however, wholly validate over 50 claims in connection with SFOR OOBA patents!
Also, as of 10 days ago, the Supreme Court disagrees with you when it stated that PTAB re-examinations of Patents should be the determining factor in validity of patents!
WOW[/b]!!!!!
According to SecureAuth, Ropes & Gray mistakenly decided last year to represent SFOR Patents due to the fact that OOBA is an age old (and Children's School) idea BEFORE computers!
One MAJOR problem SecureAuth!!!
You missed several VERY significant facts:
1. First and foremost: YOU ADMIT below that SFOR WAS THE FIRST to "describe the OOBA idea in connection with computers!"
Ropes and Gray proudly stated THE SAME POINT as well to the Judges! Additionally, last year, the PTAB RULED that it DEFINITELY MATTERS that OOBA is a PATENT PROCESS of SFOR's!!
58 - In reality, out-of-band authentication is an old idea that was used long before computers. That StrikeForce was purportedly the first to describe the idea in combination with the computer components recited in its claims is not inventive; it is merely “generic computer implementation.” Indeed, combining an abstract idea with conventional computer components does not satisfy § 101, even if the resulting combination is new. Thus, StrikeForce’s alleged distinctions over the prior art fail to establish an inventive concept. As a result, StrikeForce’s claims are invalid under §Alice 101.
The PTAB wholly disagrees with you SecureAuth! They never mentioned school children. They also never mentioned ancient Greece or WWII. They did, however, wholly validate over 50 claims in connection with SFOR OOBA patents!
Also, as of 10 days ago, the Supreme Court disagrees with you when it stated that PTAB re-examinations of Patents should be the determining factor in validity of patents!
WOW[/b]!!!!!
(14)
(0)