Kitty, thanks for the link.
You're one tough Kitty!
Number known to be in litigation…………...…….……....................2939…….….......30%
b. Certificates – 3rd PARTY REQUESTER …………………………………………..3693
(1) All claims confirmed 1012 28%
(2) All claims canceled 486 13%
(3) Claim changes 2195 59%
The only thing alarming about this is the amount of "changes", but we don't really know if the USPTO changes were miniscule or significant, nor do we know what each of "those numbers" are, or how they affected litigation.
Here's your official statement change: "It's been my experience over the years as a trader, that patents are usually rock solid in the courtroom, and it's a dice roll for the defendant".
You're focus is across the board #'s Kitty, when infact it's actually a case by case issue. TOY has alot of work to do. Ofcourse they have "options", but that does not mean that those options will more-likely-than-not prove to be successful now does it?
As you raise the issue of potential re-examination (which was never a topic of contention).... I raise the issue that Toy has not yet filed a counter suit. Isn't that the usual course of aggressive action Kitty? Maybe you can tell us why they haven't done that yet.
Tact = The ability to deal with others without creating an offense. You might be a smart Kitty, but your tactfulness could sure use some polishing.
We could play the technicality game all day long if you have time for it. In a previous post you stated words to the effect that Technical Analysis on penney stocks didn't really matter much?? I beg to differ.... Infact, I'll wholeheartedly call you on that statement. Congrats on your previously posted low buy. (But I wonder where she sold at, being that she missed the Bollinger Band squeeze on the 8th). The breakout was predictable.
I can appreciate your intellect Kitty. For all I know.... You might be a MENSA member, but even then, you certianlty aren't without flaws, now are you?
