Replies to post #151805 on NeoMedia Technologies, Inc (NEOM)

[beam11]

Krays - Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I should have informed you that fed. agents never stop investigating, and sometimes have to be directed to fold it up and go home (close the case). For supervisors, time charged and length of time the case has been in process (time span), is always a major factor. Some fed agents look for more new inventory cases to spread the excess non productive time over, if the road to "now where" investigations results in excessive and non productive investigation time.

If material new evidence is revealed in additional or excessive investigative time, a supervisor is bound to praise and reward the agent for initiative.

I am not sure, but I expect the USPTO has been loaded up with some more third party paper work, by Scanby and possibly the EFF. Unless new issues are raised (before the final decision), I am not sure how much of the paper work will be posted on line by the USPTO.

I never believed that the EFF is through with NEOM. If they fail on one patent, they could find another one. I still maintain that the ball was dropped in not requesting a reexamination of Scanbuy's patents, by NEOM. However, maybe the attorney will do this after a USPTO decision is made on NEOM's patents. If NEOM's patent claims are upheld for the most part, a reexamination of Scanbuy's patents may be determined as not warranted. However, I still maintain that the USPTO must determine that Scanbuy's patents are narrow and unenforceable, as alleged in NEOM's answer to the Scanbuy suit, because the courts nor a jury trial have jurisdiction over the validity of Scanbuys patents.

I believe in staying two steps ahead of every possible situation. Unfortunately, corporate management and law firms expand money and time to work only on emergencies.