That is simply not true. I said that commercialization could proceed without patents being issued (and often IS: what do you think that the label "patent pending" means?)
My MAIN point, repeated a number of times, is that patent filings can be done at any time and there are reasons why, once the priority date has been established (which as I pointed out numerous times it was by the provisional patent application filed in Sept 2010) there are significant advantages to not doing the further actions until either the deadline is at hand OR there is some other need to do it.
The result, as I very explicitly stated, is that AS A RULE you see patent actions done just before some event for which they are needed. AS I ALREADY POINTED OUT that doesn't mean that the failure to file the patent sooner was delaying the action for which it was necessary.
You are taking something that is commonly EXPECTED and twisting it to appear as a "problem" while ignoring evidence that it was expected and refusing to address that.
So just who is "dancing around" here?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
