Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

not cost free ... | 294 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

not cost free ...

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 04:20 PM EDT

Beautiful would be requiring the patent owner to post a bond
that would be forfeited in proportion to the fraction of
challenged claims that were disallowed. (or, or course, the
patent holder could simply remove challenged claims for a
modest fee)

--Erwin

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

not cost free ...

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 05:27 PM EDT

> Earlier this year, the fee for Ex parte reexaminations was $2520.
> A notice was posted proposing to raise this fee to as much as $17,750.

This is the major problem with the USPTO. If a patent application is made the
PTO has two options:

1) Reject. This requires written justification for the rejection and large
amounts of work to back it up.

2) Accept. Much less work and they keep the money, and get annual fees.

If the patent is challenged they get a re-exam fee, which they keep either way.
(hint: they only get this for accepted patents).

If the re-exam is rejected they may get an appeal, for which they collect a
fee.

There is no side, they do not have to pay for the resulting court cases, licence
fees, loss of business, or any other results.

Maximum revenue is obtained by:
Accepting as many patents as possible.
Doing Re-exams and rejecting them.
Dealing with the appeals.

Everything else is someone else's problem.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

love the analysis..USPTO makes $$ on bad patents (n/t) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 05:32 PM EDT

Does the cost start at a cool $2 Million?

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 06:02 PM EDT

That's the general price you need to be looking at with regards defending a patent lawsuit.

So... to file for re-examination of a patent, what is the general cost in comparison to defending against said patent?

Somehow... I don't think it's anywhere near $2 Million.

$50k? $100k? $250k? Any one of those values is still significantly cheaper then defending against a Lawsuit.

And Google did both this time around... initiated the re-examinations plus paid the price for defending the lawsuit. How much in costs did they absorb in discovery surrounding the patents that were ultimately rejected?

Very curious questions exist!

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )