Is This The Same Re-exam?
I suppose it all depends on how you spin it. Can you determine who really "lost" in this re-exam?
Visto, whose patent was challenged, announced:
Visto Corporation, a leading global provider of secure push email, today announced that the United States Patent & Trademark Office has upheld a majority of the claims contained within Visto's U.S. Patent No. 6,085,192 in the re-examination of that patent requested by Seven Networks, Inc. After considering Seven's request and assessing the merits of the patent, the Patent Office determined in its first office action that at least 15 of the patent's 25 claims are valid. This includes the claims at issue in Visto's ongoing patent infringement litigation against Seven in federal district court in Marshall, Texas.
And Seven, the opposing party announced:
Today, SEVEN announced that the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") rejected the base claims of Visto Corporation's US Patent 6,085,192. After conducting its review, the PTO found that all of the independent claims of the '192 Patent were unpatentable in view of prior art references asserted by SEVEN.

1 Comments:
And on a lighter note than pure massachusetts lawyer , check out the funniest trial transcript ever! If it's not serious enough of a topic, well, just pretend it's the Brit's version of massachusetts lawyer !
Post a Comment
<< Home