tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post2879535191699412792..comments2024-03-25T10:31:40.979+00:00Comments on Tufty the Cat: Patent Office Opinions - s73 RevocationsTufty the Cathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803006996232662500noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-28177024445713318532020-08-03T16:12:26.153+00:002020-08-03T16:12:26.153+00:00"the Opinions service could be seen as a usef..."the Opinions service could be seen as a useful way of trying out a case to see what might work without committing to any particular aspect, the only downside being that the proprietor will then be forewarned and ready next time. This seems to have been used in only one case so far though"<br /><br />Soon to be 2 cases ;-)Grebbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15101036067084453523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-90650757653940475082020-07-27T10:07:02.663+00:002020-07-27T10:07:02.663+00:00In Opinion 21/17 a request to examine novelty but ...In Opinion 21/17 a request to examine novelty but not include inventive step was an unfortunate oversight in a case that appeared to be ‘clear cut’.<br /><br />The examiner found three of the four claims in EP1062631 to lack novelty over Japanese patent application JPH08224331 . Both documents relate to golfing systems, in which RFID technology is used to determine which ball a player is driving from an automated teeing system. Each ball has an embedded wireless transponder (RFID tag) that transmits a unique identifying code to a reader when it passes within communication range of the reader.<br /><br />The examiner found Claim 2 of EP1062631 novel, but tantalizingly hints that this claim could lack inventive step. However, since he had "not been asked to consider the question of inventive step" the examiner did not provide an opinion on this question. It does appear that most requesters challenging validity ask for an opinion on “novelty and/or inventive step” or words to that effect. It is thus advisable to include inventive step as well as novelty in all cases.<br /> <br /><br />In JPH08224331 the RFID tag is read just prior to moving onto a push rod. In EP1062631, the tag is read when it rests on an equivalent push rod.<br /><br />My patent agent tried to argue the case for lack of novelty on claim 2 (based on its grammatical construction) but the reply from the IPO was as follows: “The opinion service is a low-cost service that aims to help resolve a potential or actual dispute. There is no provision to amend the opinion.”<br /><br />In response to the Opinion, the proprietor surrendered the patent. It had already served its purpose to help generate huge revenues and create TopGolf - a leading brand in the golf industry.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com