Arch Stanton
it was the grave marked unknown right beside
- Messages
- 6,474
- Reaction score
- 0
Apple's Patent Problems: USPTO Invalidates The Rubber Banding Patent
Tim Worstall, Contributor
This is something of a problem for Apple in the never-ending patent litigation against Samsung. The USPTO has just invalidated the patent on bounce back scrolling (or as I’ve called it, the List Scrolling Bounce Back patent). Very well done indeed to Florian Mueller for spotting this:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has good news for Samsung, and Samsung has already shared it with Judge Koh in a late-night filing. In a non-final Office action the USPTO has declared all 20 claims of Apple’s rubber-banding patent (U.S. Patent No, 7,469,381 invalid, including claim 19, which Apple successfully asserted against Samsung in the summer trial in California. In fact, claim 19 is one of several claims to be deemed invalid for two reasons, either one of which would be sufficient on its own.
Do go and read Mueller for the full detail of this. The basic case is simply stated though.
Read more:http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...-uspto-invalidates-the-rubber-banding-patent/
Tim Worstall, Contributor
This is something of a problem for Apple in the never-ending patent litigation against Samsung. The USPTO has just invalidated the patent on bounce back scrolling (or as I’ve called it, the List Scrolling Bounce Back patent). Very well done indeed to Florian Mueller for spotting this:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has good news for Samsung, and Samsung has already shared it with Judge Koh in a late-night filing. In a non-final Office action the USPTO has declared all 20 claims of Apple’s rubber-banding patent (U.S. Patent No, 7,469,381 invalid, including claim 19, which Apple successfully asserted against Samsung in the summer trial in California. In fact, claim 19 is one of several claims to be deemed invalid for two reasons, either one of which would be sufficient on its own.
Do go and read Mueller for the full detail of this. The basic case is simply stated though.
Read more:http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...-uspto-invalidates-the-rubber-banding-patent/
: 