decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
Reexaminations - Detailed Tables - UPDATED
Wednesday, June 29 2011 @ 07:56 AM EDT

A number of readers wrote in asking for more detail in the tables showing the reexaminations in the Oracle and Interval Licensing cases. Specifically, folks asked for a breakdown by type of claim, greater clarity as to whether claims were simply excluded from reexamination or confirmed by the examiner upon reexamination, and a bit more explanation about how the table works. So here we go.

In these updated tables we now show claims by type, independent versus dependent, since independent claims tend to be far more important. We have also added a new column to show claims that were the subject of the reexamination petition but which, after due consideration by the examiner, were confirmed, i.e., not rejected.

Some clarification on the percentages shown. Percent of All Claims is percentage of all claims by type. In other words, the fact that 52 out of 56 independent claims were subject to reexamination in the table below means that 92.86% of the independent claims in those seven patents were reexamined.

In contrast, Percent of Claims Reexamined shows the calculation of claims subject to reexamination that have been rejected in an office action to date, so it only calculates the percentage on those patents that have had an office action, excluding those that have not. In the case below that means that 15 of the 17 independent claims subject to reexamination in patents '702, '520, '476, and '720 were rejected, or 88.24%.

Finally, a claim is shown as surviving if it was (a) not subject to reexamination, (b) subject to reexamination but confirmed, or (c) approved for reexamined but not yet reexamined, i.e., no first office action has issued. So if you add the columns Claims Rejected and Claims Surviving it equals the totals in the Claims columns.

_________________________

Oracle v. Google as of 2011-06-27























Patent No. Claims Claims Not Subject to Reexam Claims Subject to Reexam Claims Rejected Claims Confirmed Claims Surviving

Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep
RE38104 30 11 2 8 28 3 - - - - 30 11
5966702 4 19 1 13 3 6 3 6 0 0 1 13
6061520 4 19 0 1 4 18 2 6 2 12 2 13
6125447 5 19 0 0 5 19 - - - - 5 19
6192476 7 14 0 0 7 14 7 10 0 4 0 4
6910205 3 11 1 7 2 4 - - - - 3 11
7426720 3 19 0 2 3 17 3 17 0 0 0 2
Totals 56 112 4 31 52 81 15 39 2 16 41 73
Percent of All Claims 100.00% 100.00% 7.14% 27.68% 92.86% 72.32% 26.79% 34.82% 3.57% 14.29% 73.21% 65.18%
Percent of Claims Reexamined





88.24% 70.91%



_____________________

Interval Licensing vs. AOL et al
as of 2011-06-27






















Patent No. Claims Claims Not Subject to Reexam Claims Subject to Reexam Claims Rejected Claims Confirmed Claims Surviving

Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep Ind Dep
6263507 15 114 11 90 4 24 - - - - 15 114
6034652 9 9 5 4 4 5 - - - - 9 9
6788314 6 9 0 0 6 9 6 9 0 0 0 0
6757682 3 17 0 4 3 13 1 13 2 0 2 4
Totals 33 149 16 98 17 51 7 22 2 0 26 127
Percent of All Claims 100.00% 100.00% 48.48% 65.77% 51.52% 34.23% 21.21% 14.77% 6.06% 0.00% 78.79% 85.23%
Percent of Claims Reexamined





77.78% 100.00%



************

UPDATE

In the above tables the columns marked Ind and Dep refer to independent and dependent claims, respectively. Independent claims, as the term implies, are claims that stand independent of any other claims made. They are the broadest and most important claims. Dependent claims, as the term implies, are claims that are dependent on other claims, either independent or dependent, and tend to further refine or narrow the scope of the claimed invention. As discussed in this earlier story, the loss of independent claims can be huge in infringement litigation, and to the extent a dependent claim survives reexamination while the claim(s) on which it depends do not, the dependent claim is read to incorporate all of the language of the claims upon which it depends.


  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )