Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Whose Prior Art Filing Triggered Eolas Reexam?

Posted by timothy on from the mysterious-ways dept.

theodp writes "The Eolas patent case history shows another prior art filing was quietly made ten days before the widely-publicized W3C filing and two weeks before Tim Berner-Lee's reexam request. Now Ray Ozzie speculates the earlier filing was one being floated at the time that was jointly signed by a number of other parties who supported W3C member Dave Raggett's prior art, which Microsoft unsuccessfully tried to use in the $521 million Eolas lawsuit. Ozzie also notes that those involved argued for all to stand solidly behind the Raggett prior art and not cite anything else. So who are these other parties, and was it their filing and lobbying that triggered the Eolas reexam?"

3 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. I find the patent by Srividya · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the Eolas text. Who thinks such a thing novel?

  2. What this is all about by milgr · · Score: 5, Informative

    The poster could have indicated what all these patents were about - instead of referencing them by somewhat obscure names.

    These patents deal with browser plugins - and relate to a lawsuit that Microsoft lost.

    --
    Where law ends, tyranny begins -- William Pitt
  3. Re:Serious Question for L's and IANAL's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Filing papers isn't too hard, but you'll want to be sure you are using the right form: (PTO/SB/42)

    http://www.uspto.gov/web/forms/sb0042.pdf

    There are several ways to file prior art depending on the status of the application, but this is likely what you are looking for. This filing, known as a "501", is free. It is unlikely that the PTO will decide to reexamine a patent on their own volition(known as sua sponte). Usually you have to file a request for a reexamination. The fee is about $9,000, plus the cost of counsel.

    If you'd like to do some light reading on this kind of filing, it was created under Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, rule 1.501 (cited as 37 C.F.R. 1.501). You can find a reference in the United States Code at 35 U.S.C. 301 (the law) and in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP), the book the patent examiners use, at MPEP 2202. All of these resources are on the web, but check that you are looking at the latest revision (Feb 2003, 8th edition, first revision). These are all available at the USPTO website.

    This isn't intended to be legal advice, and this doesn't mean that I am accepting you as a client. If you are planning to try and take down a major patent (or do much of anything with the USPTO) you really ought to seek qualified representation. I'm not a lawyer, but I am a member of the patent bar (basically I have a license to file for patents).