Not disagreeing with you, but here is my take. I t
Post# of 82686
(Total Views: 689)
Posted On: 02/05/2019 9:34:59 AM
Not disagreeing with you, but here is my take. I think that particular Judge was over simplifying the method in which SFOR already has patents for and about regarding OOBA. It seems to me the KM team wanted to take SFOR's patents and compare them to everyday, ordinary life practices and procedures, when if we stop and think about the rudimentary comparisons that KM is making, and thereby conclude that SFOR has not developed anything new (art) because even a bank can call up a person to get a voice recognition or a child can take a note to school....if SFOR's art was not new and an improvement over current computer and communication process, then we would not have been awarded the patents to begin with, nor withstood the IPR's and ALICE hearings....and have the SCOTUS ruling in our back pocket pretty much stating the PTAB rules over decisions about patent validity.
I think that IF we were at the early stages of Ram seeking a patent for his new art, and yesterday was a hearing to award or deny his request, then it might seem a little shaky with the questions the Judges asked, but we all have to remember that we own the patents whether or not KM, SA, or the Judge agrees and/or compares it to everything since the days of the Greeks and Romans. I truly believe the Judges were asking clarifying questions from each attorney just to see what they would say...my old mentor used to tell me " I already know the answer, I just want to see how prepared you are about the subject matter" and he sure asked a lot of questions.
I listened to the audio several times and my take is the Judges will support the latest rulings from SCOTUS and not challenge the SCOTUS regarding the patent validity.....simply because KM mostly argued 103 and not 101 relative to the case, etc...just as Judge K did...and the Appeals decision will also tell Judge K he was wrong...again
Finally, if the SFOR's OOBA was as simple as they all say, I doubt all of the infringers clients would be using our patented processes...its being infringed on for a good reason. AIMHO
I think that IF we were at the early stages of Ram seeking a patent for his new art, and yesterday was a hearing to award or deny his request, then it might seem a little shaky with the questions the Judges asked, but we all have to remember that we own the patents whether or not KM, SA, or the Judge agrees and/or compares it to everything since the days of the Greeks and Romans. I truly believe the Judges were asking clarifying questions from each attorney just to see what they would say...my old mentor used to tell me " I already know the answer, I just want to see how prepared you are about the subject matter" and he sure asked a lot of questions.
I listened to the audio several times and my take is the Judges will support the latest rulings from SCOTUS and not challenge the SCOTUS regarding the patent validity.....simply because KM mostly argued 103 and not 101 relative to the case, etc...just as Judge K did...and the Appeals decision will also tell Judge K he was wrong...again
Finally, if the SFOR's OOBA was as simple as they all say, I doubt all of the infringers clients would be using our patented processes...its being infringed on for a good reason. AIMHO
(11)
(0)