Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents Government News Politics

1-Click Smacked Down Again, While Reexam Languishes 72

Posted by timothy
from the waiting-game-is-rigged dept.
theodp writes "Pressed on Amazon's 1-Click patent, then-USPTO Chief Q. Todd Dickinson got testy: "I make this challenge all the time. If you're aware of prior art out there that invalidates a patent that is existing, file a re-examination. We'll be happy to take a look at it." Really? It's been 3+ years since unemployed actor Peter Calveley submitted prior art that triggered a USPTO reexamination of the 1-Click patent. Still no 'final answer' from the USPTO. To put things in perspective, 1-Click inventor Jeff Bezos once proposed a three-year lifespan for patents (later retracted), let alone patent reexams. In the meantime, other patent examiners have repeatedly smacked down 1-Click — the latest (non-final) rejection was issued on Feb. 10th with Sandra Bullock's help."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

1-Click Smacked Down Again, While Reexam Languishes

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 21, 2009 @08:05PM (#26944917)

    Too bad... I thought they found prior art in 2005's "The Net" screenplay.

  • From May,2000 (Score:2, Informative)

    by Windrip (303053) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @09:04PM (#26945283) Journal

    This is a transcript of an interview conducted 24-May-2000

    Dipshits = /.

  • Re:From May,2000 (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 21, 2009 @10:20PM (#26945685)
    W-o-w. Linking to an article that's almost nine years old...that has to be some kind of Slashdot record.
  • by Dachannien (617929) on Saturday February 21, 2009 @10:24PM (#26945701)

    Actually, a final rejection was made on the re-exam case, but Amazon filed an RCE (request for continued examination). Essentially, as long as Amazon is willing to (a) pay the fee and (b) make some sort of submission that merits further examination (e.g., amending the claims or presenting another prior art reference they want considered), they can keep the re-exam going until the cows come home. The next action after an RCE is usually non-final - it's a bit like starting the examination process over again.

    On a side note, after the RCE and before the subsequent non-final Office action, Amazon submitted an IDS (information disclosure statement, on which they list further references they wish to have considered) that was 36 pages long. That's not a 36-page reference - the list of references itself took 36 pages.

  • Re:Peter's Talent (Score:4, Informative)

    by theodp (442580) on Sunday February 22, 2009 @01:45PM (#26949697)

    Sorry if it came across that way; certainly wasn't the intent. Indeed, Peter's efforts here even left legal professionals impressed [patentbaristas.com]: "It turns out that New Zealander Peter Calveley is one of the actors who provided the motions for computer-generated elves and orcs in Two Towers. He also has been laid up of late due to an accident (I can relate). He has now put his free time to use taking on a David and Goliath effort against Amazon...I have to admit, I was quite intrigued by the whole affair given that a Request for Re-Exam is not something average citizens take on in their spare time. After some correspondence, we spoke by telephone briefly -- since I was unwilling to write about his efforts if this was all a scam. I found that Calveley is extremely bright and has his own inventions and understands computer patents and procedures quite well. He has the time and will to do this even if it won't bring him a direct benefit."

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. -- Cartoon caption

Working...