UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[VortMax]

how important do you think those claims are? if you consider all other claims on 822, and all claims on the other 2 patents are patentable by Chanbond. From your experience is there a way to say that the technology is 65% patented for example, or is it always 100% patentable or 0% patentable?

https://www.law360.com/articles/907966/ptab-nixes-six-cisco-ipr-petitions-over-networking-patents


Andrea Pacelli, an attorney with Mishcon de Reya New York LLP who represented ChanBond, told Law360 on Thursday that the board’s decision focused on two elements: claims construction regarding the term “RF channel” and analysis of potential prior art references that Cisco had put forth.

The board found that the term “RF channel” should be given the "broadest reasonable interpretation." As such, it does not include “code channels” such as data streams and only applies to frequency bands. The PTAB also said that asserted prior art references can’t be combined to reach the patents at issue.

“We agree with patent owner that petitioner does not show adequately that any of the cited portions of the prior art references teach modulating digital information into at least two separate RF channels as required by each of the challenged claims,” the board said.

Robert Whitman, lead attorney for ChanBond, said in a Thursday statement that the company was pleased that the PTAB agreed with ChanBond "on virtually all issues."

“The board’s decision confirms the strength of ChanBond’s patents,” he said.

Counsel for Cisco declined to comment Thursday.

The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,341,679 and 8,894,565.