You mean the stable geniuses who incorrectly approved the vague, abstract VPLM patents? They fell for the oldest trick in the book - the page after page of techno and legal speak caused them to miss that the actual inventive part is completely missing all details.
Read some of the reports on the inner workings at USPTO. The workers have mere hours to plow through all of the research and review and report writing necessary to approve/reject a patent. It's no wonder the patent trolls keep weaseling through the gauntlet.
They should rely on the trained experts at the USPTO.
Thanks. What you said makes sense now. Explains why Hudnell answers were shaky. I hope he would do a good job on the second appeal since he wrote it himself. Wonder when it is scheduled.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
