or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by NormM

I really think that some AAPL investors should sue AppleInsider over these misleading stories. Are you being paid to do this? No Apple patents have been invalidated recently. A first office action in a re-examination proceeding is almost meaningless. To use this "news" to write scurrilous headlines is criminal, in my opinion.
I've never been involved in litigation, just in writing patents.  If a patent claim is changed that is the basis of ongoing litigation, I assume the court would have to decide whether or not the changes made matter to the case.   But even without changing anything, the examination process is long and this is just the first step, and doesn't really tell us anything about the final outcome.  After the initial two examinations there can be requests for continued examination,...
I've been through a zillion examinations. The first office action is almost always a rejection of all claims. The first action is non-final. The second action, if no claims are changed, is listed as final. But if you change anything in a claim in response, then you're back to non-final. This can go on ad infinitum. There is no limit.
This story is idiotic! Look at the document included in the story: this is about an office action!! The patent has not been invalidated!!!!! This is a re-examination, and this patent has been previously re-examined and upheld. Examinations almost always begin by the examiner rejecting all claims. I hope some investors that get fooled by this story sue the pants off AppleInsider!
Apple can get a patent on their improvements, but that in no way invalidates the original patent. Having a patent doesn't protect you from earlier patents on pieces of what you do.
Link to app works fine for me. When you do a search, thumb up on the result banner at the bottom for more info, including street view.
Almost every examination of a valid patent starts like this. The examiner comes up with some prior art that resembles the independent claim and rejects all the claims. Then the respondent argues a bit, and maybe narrows the independent claim a little, and after some back-and-forth like this all the claims are granted.
As of this writing, the note above has been added but the article is still incorrect.
What people have found is that the Lightning cable contains a chip that uses a one-pin serial connection for a fixed indentification number. This kind of chip has been used to identify battery packs, for example. Since the Lightning connector is supposed to be future proof, you'd expect the interface to include identifying information to tell it what electrical and logical protocol to use. It seems like a leap to call this an authentication chip.
This series of TI chips is generally used for product identification: returning an identification number on a 1-pin serial interface. Since the Lightning connector is planned to be future proof, I would expect it to require cables to identify what hardware and software interface to use.
New Posts  All Forums: