InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 313
Posts 52631
Boards Moderated 14
Alias Born 08/19/2009

Re: patchman post# 83871

Saturday, 09/25/2010 12:42:33 PM

Saturday, September 25, 2010 12:42:33 PM

Post# of 103340

Did you ever get a valid response WRT this patent issue.


No direct answer, but Veno said he did ask the company this issue. I read this company response reported by Veno as a "no" to the patent filing. How about you?

Oh..and the many posts today about the patent are a non-event..the company can file for a non-provisional patent pending on etc anytime they choose to..Also prior art and intent goes a long way..I would look for an update on that instead of the speculative posts..A little DD always helps when speculation runs rampant.


As you know, we have had no update... and the company's response was lies and half truths. As you may have noticed, I do not throw the term "lie" around frequently... I suggest whomever provided Veno with that information has no knowledge of patents and/or has not discussed it with a patent attorney.

If they missed the deadline, and it sure appears that they did, Expo can NOT patent anything that was disclosed or claimed in their Provisional filing... nor can they patent anything that was shown in their video or has been installed anywhere as it is now prior art. They had EXACTLY one year to file and if they didn't... they lost the ability to do so... PERIOD. If you do not believe me, do a little research on the net or contact a patent attorney.

And the comment:

Also prior art and intent goes a long way


... is utterly meaningless! Prior art is now their enemy, and I see no relevance to the term intent here... sounds like someone was just throwing legal terms around to bamboozle the caller.