Saturday, September 24, 2016 4:48:32 AM
I don't understand why Google would waste time examining technical materials if their intention was simply to attempt to re-file portions of the '339 patent as a new patent, since the '339 patent had been viewable by the public for something like 8 years before that.
Ican's allegation that Google is attempting to patent this technology while simultaneously challenging the patentability
of this technology is.... confusing.
It's also strange that he is saying the unpatentability challenge "doesn't mean much" ... if it means so little why does Google spend money on it? If it "doesn't mean much" why does Nash write a message complaining at her unhappiness that 7 of the 13 claims in the patent will likely be successfully challenged?
I don't know how it's possible to slice this unpatentability challenge to be a positive result for MAXD, but I'm sure management + supporters on the forums will somehow claim it was an essential and expected part of the master plan to eventually win billions from google.
Endexx Corporation (EDXC) Leverages Global Market Trends and Legislative Reforms to Spearhead Growth in the Cannabis and Plant-Based Wellness Sectors • EDXC • Mar 27, 2024 3:01 PM
Applied UV, Inc. Announces Pricing of $2.76 Million Registered Direct and Private Placement Priced at the Market Under Nasdaq Rules • AUVI • Mar 27, 2024 2:51 PM
POET and MultiLane Collaborate to Develop High-Speed Pluggable Transceivers for AI Networks • POET • Mar 27, 2024 10:52 AM
Maybacks Global Entertainment Opens 23 More Stations in Important Major Cities • AHRO • Mar 27, 2024 9:00 AM
NxGen Brands Inc. Forecast to Deliver 140% Growth in Q1 2024 • NXGB • Mar 27, 2024 7:30 AM
Kona Gold Beverages, Inc. Strategic Advancements: Covert LLC Introduces Federally Legal D9 Gummies and Revamps Innovative eCommerce Platform, Propelling Toward $12 Million Annual Revenue Goal • KGKG • Mar 26, 2024 8:30 AM