Of course it relates to the patents, that's what this company is but one would have to do a whole lot of reading to fully understand the magnitude of what I am about to post but please feel free to do so. I took the time to transcribe this excerpt from a document published last week with respect to LI, It should be considered with respect to the entire industry as you will see. It was written by someone completely separated from the company, let's call that a third party.
"8,422,507, and it’s prior art, and after thorough research of the prior art, Examiner has found that the claims are allowable. References cited with respect to U.S. Patent No. 8,422,507(e.g. Thesayi et al. (U.S. 8,116,307) and Fiatal et al. (US 2006/0093135), both IDS references for the instant application) represent the closest prior art to the claimed invention. Thesayi et al. teaches the lawful intercept of IP traffic between devices. The relayed traffic is mirrored (copied) and sent to an analyzer based on dialing profile, comprising intercept determination information, contained within a database and associated with a subscriber. Fiatal et al. teaches similar features. Both references, however, are deficient with respect to a routing message being separate from any message sent between a subscriber and another party, the routing message including at least some of the determination information and destination information associated with the subscriber dialing profile. Additional references cited with this office action disclose teachings similar to those of Thesayi et al. and Fiatal et al. but are deficient in the same manner as Thesayi et al. and Fiatal et al."
Otis L Thompson Jr
