Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

We are looking for moderators.  Message the admin if interested.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
 31 
 on: 02-16-18 at 03:08 pm 
Started by khazzah - Last post by still_learnin
In a situation where examiner is simply alleging that method of doing something is obvious based on similar area of technology, e.g., method of converting data from sign language visuals to text is obvious because microphone in your phone also converts electrical signals into text. Both technologies are drastically different.

Claims are pretty similar in terms of customizing/optimizing algorithms for converting sensor data to text but application claim specifically are for data received from sign langage visuals, calibration algorithms are different on how to convert are different but overall claim is little broad which I can't change.

There is good argument for motivation and reasonable expectation of success here but can I also argue in terms of scope/content and comparison of claim with PA ?

Just to clarify: you're saying you think the Examiner made a good case for the rationale to combine, and you're asking about strategies you can use to rebut the 103? And more specifically, you're asking if you can make a "combination of references don't teach" argument even though it's a 103 not a 102?

If not, please clarify what you're asking.

FWIW, I think your question is better suited as a new topic rather than a change of direction in this topic.

 32 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:47 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by ThomasPaine
So it's the black guy's fault you couldn't get hired?

Somebody else needs to remove their head from their rectum.

 33 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:45 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by ThomasPaine
"Try reading a little more objectively."

Try writing better.   ;D

 34 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:42 pm 
Started by khazzah - Last post by DCIPAgent
In a situation where examiner is simply alleging that method of doing something is obvious based on similar area of technology, e.g., method of converting data from sign language visuals to text is obvious because microphone in your phone also converts electrical signals into text. Both technologies are drastically different. Claims are pretty similar in terms of customizing/optimizing algorithms for converting sensor data to text but application claim specifically are for data received from sign langage visuals, calibration algorithms are different on how to convert are different but overall claim is little broad which I can't change. There is good argument for motivation and reasonable expectation of success here but can I also argue in terms of scope/content and comparison of claim with PA ?

 35 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:41 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by MYK
I'm taking out hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, an all or nothing bet on life.
This is a really bad idea IMHO.  You have a reasonable shot at biglaw with that 60% stat, but if you hate it or don't make it, you're going to have to choose between being miserable or being buried.

My perspective is colored by having graduated in 2011, when the previous two years of graduating classes had been told, "umm, we're gonna defer you, go do something else for a year or two until the Great Constitutional Scholar (and, later, the president with the worst record at the Supreme Court since the Civil War) who's ruining, sorry, running the country stops making things worse" and my class got told "we're not hiring, good luck!"

I was fortunate in that my scholarship covered most of my costs and I had resources to cover the rest.  If I'd graduated with serious debt I would've been utterly fucked.  A lot of my classmates were.  The school had previously been placing about a third of the class in biglaw;  I think we had about 10% get hired for biglaw, and I saw some of those lose those jobs within months.  I ran into one of my classmates at the bar exam who eventually gave up and went back to being a social worker.  Her roughly $30K/yr salary isn't ever going to pay off her $200K in student loans.  Only about half of the class found jobs as lawyers, and a lot of the ones I know only "got" those jobs by going into solo practice.

Anyway, whatever you choose to do, good luck.  Be aware that many lawyers have personalities like (used) TP.

 36 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:13 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by oxfordrama
"Some of you seem insecure."

_________________

Or maybe everyone is envious of you? That could also be it.

Rheo, that sounds absurd to me. I'm taking out hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, an all or nothing bet on life. Best case scenario, I could wind up miserable as anyone here. My background is sporadic, not prestigious, and I don't impress. One moment I'm in chemical engineering, another I'm in public interest, yet another I'm betting my future on a pedigree. These people are too wise to be envious of someone who's future is such a crap shoot.

 37 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:07 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by Rheo
"Some of you seem insecure."

_________________

Or maybe everyone is envious of you? That could also be it.

 38 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:04 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by oxfordrama
I'm already sick of getting these dramatic, emotional projections. What's you guys' deal? I've never implied condescension toward prosecution. No one asked why I don't want it. It's because I've had some experience with it and failed at it, just like with engineering. It was a bad fit because I was poor at it. I don't want litigation because prosecution is below me, or because I think prosecution is below litigation, or because I think litigation makes more money than prosecution. I don't dislike engineers because I think they are below me. Some of you seem insecure. Try reading a little more objectively.

For what it's worth, since you all seem to need a confidence boost from strangers, I inherently respect patent prosecutors and engineers because they tend to excel at things I've always struggled with. Litigation and transaction are left by process of elimination for me based on my personal experiences with engineering and patents, few and shallow as those experiences may or may not be.

 39 
 on: 02-16-18 at 02:01 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by Rheo
I think Oxfordrama irritates some people because all he has is a Bachelor's degree in chemical engineering. That's it.

All the rest, despite that fact, is kind of dismissively being condescending and choosy because all of the stuff he's ... going to ... do. In the future. And he will never hit any road bumps.

I kind of cringe because that's exactly how I was in my early 20s and am kind of surprised that people didn't give me more guff at the time. If I met my 20's self at my age now, I would give myself crap too. I was MSEE and JD. Big deal, it's just school.


 40 
 on: 02-16-18 at 01:59 pm 
Started by oxfordrama - Last post by oxfordrama
Lesson #1:  Don't look down your nose at any area of practice.  Most definitely not in a job interview.  Not even on the internet.  Somebody who makes their living doing what you consider beneath you might take offense.
There has been a big misunderstanding. I'm beneath prosecution. It's outside my natural skillset. I don't like engineers because I can't fit in with them. I respect them.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10


Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.138 seconds with 18 queries.