![](http://investorshub.advfn.com/images/default_ih_profile2_4848.jpg?cb=0)
Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:26:47 PM
As regards "the patent office will find out that there was no specific prior art" .... the USPTO already found that there was prior art. They described that finding in detail in a 78-page document.
The USPTO's current interpretation of the prior art/prior patents and their relevance to Claims 1-95 in NEOM's patent-in-question resulted in the USPTO "rejecting" each of those claims in a non-final action. Neomedia can reply/argue.
jonesie
Yorkville / Cornell Tracking Board #board-9964
"I can think of no more valuable commodity than information"
VAYK Exited Caribbean Investments for $320,000 Profit • VAYK • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Flotation Cell Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
Branded Legacy, Inc. and Hemp Emu Announce Strategic Partnership to Enhance CBD Product Manufacturing • BLEG • Jun 27, 2024 8:30 AM
POET Wins "Best Optical AI Solution" in 2024 AI Breakthrough Awards Program • POET • Jun 26, 2024 10:09 AM
HealthLynked Promotes Bill Crupi to Chief Operating Officer • HLYK • Jun 26, 2024 8:00 AM
Bantec's Howco Short Term Department of Defense Contract Wins Will Exceed $1,100,000 for the current Quarter • BANT • Jun 25, 2024 10:00 AM