Replies to post #16582 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[LOL]

The cert of correction covers that now, it just didn't apply to this case because it had to be issued before the start of the case to apply, not after, thus the judge had to go with the then current info, which did not have a reference to the provisional application thus making the patents invalid. The whole issue of summary judgement had to do with there not being a reference on the front page of the 045 to the provisional, and now there is since the cert of correction was granted. In the SJ ruling she is explaining why she was granting the SJ, and those are the reasons, but now the 1995 provisional is referenced on the 045 per the cert of correction. All of this is also stated in todays PR.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=61455203&symbol=WDDD

[rolvram]

I don't think you get it:

a. The filed the provisional
b. They started practising on their own invention
c. they filed the full patent within one year
d. they did indeed reference the provisional patent in their full patent application and correspondence with the USPTO but the reference was omitted by the USPTO when they issued the patent.
5. The USPTO corrected THEIR mistake and included the reference to the provisional in 2013