How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask montysimmons Your Own Question

montysimmons
montysimmons, Patent Prosecutor
Category: Intellectual Property Law
Satisfied Customers: 230
Experience:  Electrical Engineer, South Carolina Attorney, Member of US Patent Bar
Type Your Intellectual Property Law Question Here...
montysimmons is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Where a new patent for BN is issued apparently authorizing

Resolved Question:

Where a new patent for BN is issued apparently authorizing the owner of the first to use the similar technology NN with the first, 2 projections for virtually the same price, then with in your view would patent #1 block an inventor from patenting and or marketing that similar NN technology?
Submitted: 11 months ago.
Category: Intellectual Property Law
Expert:  replied 11 months ago.

montysimmons :

hello, you there

Customer:

hi Monty thanks for your knowledeable input

montysimmons :

you are welcome

montysimmons :

I do not fully understand the question yet

montysimmons :

I have read it several times

Customer:

Lex Machina Site Definition: Web site, services, features, functionalities, etc., may be collectively referred to as “Lex Machina” or the “Lex Machina Services”.have a data base of 130,000 legal decisions and 6m datasets for dealing with patents a consortium of Apple Google IBM etc not positive.

Customer:

OK sorry maybe my own mental confusion. I have 3 patents my thinking has been that the end user is entitled to a text analysis of the probabilities using BN and NN and also a graphical display using DTS. My question is are there any proective teeth in #2 and #3?

Customer:

and my thinking is that there is no indication Lex Macina is using either BN or NN or DTS to deal witht he issues.

montysimmons :

give me a minute

Customer:

time is no problem

Customer:

Hi again

montysimmons :

hello, I am reading a little of the 3 patent NN again

Customer:

Thx. It was initially rejected but my patent attorney and I agreed to modify it to piggyback with the BN patent.

montysimmons :

yes, I saw that and the Examiner required a restriction I belive

montysimmons :

terminal disclaimer

montysimmons :

not a restrictin

Customer:

I think we proposed the restriction to overcome the rejection

montysimmons :

OK, I quickly reviewed the File wrapper, did not go too deep into the issues\

montysimmons :

that takes lost of time

montysimmons :

lots

montysimmons :

OK, could you ask your questions again

montysimmons :

perhaps reword the question

Customer:

Do you see a significant protective value re NN in #3?

montysimmons :

give me a few more minutes. I am reviewing the written description as to your definitions for BN and NN and the differences between the two.

Customer:

I assume you are of the view that there are hundreds of AI algorithms around: BN, NN, decision trees, support vector machines, k-nearest neighbors, evolutionary algorithms, fuzzy logic, rough sets, association rules, and all are building blocks that don't create an application by themselves – there is a need for heavy investment as AI cannot do everything by itself, like a magic.

montysimmons :

yes, lots of AI algorithms

Customer:

I guess my question is to what extent would my patents together cover AI algorithims in the legal decision making field using BN, NN and or DTS?

montysimmons :

OK, the claims of the third patent

montysimmons :

8,447,713

montysimmons :

seem basically the same as the claims for the first patent with the addition of the NN limitations

montysimmons :

if that a fair evaluation ?

montysimmons :

I am reading the disclosure on artifical neural network

montysimmons :

artifical

Customer:

sorry I do not understand your phrase the "addition of the NN limitations"

montysimmons :

Looking at Claim 1 for 8,306,936 (first patent) and 8,447,713 (third patent)

montysimmons :

as you noted, and based on my review, Claim one in the third patent simply adds the neural network requirement (i.e. limitations) to the claimed method.

Customer:

OK still confused by the term "limitation"

montysimmons :

I see

montysimmons :

that could have two meanings

montysimmons :

when one is considering the scope of a claim, any claimed feature that narrows the scope of a claim is a "limitation"

Customer:

OK so it is a permissive extension to some extent of the BN but what effect does that have, if any on NN copycats

montysimmons :

as in "limitation" to the claim's scope

montysimmons :

not a negative thing

Customer:

thx

montysimmons :

claims must contain "limitations" or they will not be valid

montysimmons :

the trick is to only have desired and necessary limitations

Customer:

OK I have finally grasped that concept

montysimmons :

so you asked "Do you see a significant protective value re NN in #3?"

montysimmons :

Answer: Only if patent one is found to be invalid because of prior art.

Customer:

So I guess it comes back as always to potential blocking of BN, NN and DTS copycats and whether I need additional non-provisionals

montysimmons :

restated, I believe claim 1 of patent 3 could have been a dependent claim to claim 1 of patent 1

Customer:

OK so if #1 is found to be invalid #3 still has some protective value with regard to NN argorithms

montysimmons :

with the necessary disclosure in the written description

montysimmons :

Yes

montysimmons :

claim 3 is basically a safety net

montysimmons :

I sorry

montysimmons :

patent 3

montysimmons :

for someone to infringe claim 1 of patent 3 they will also have to infringe claim 1 of patent 1

Customer:

OK you have me interested (as in need of higher education)

montysimmons :

I am speaking a little loosely here

Customer:

excellent, I appreciate that

montysimmons :

If you were to sue for infringement of patent 1 and patent 3

montysimmons :

claim 1 in both patents

Customer:

are the same

montysimmons :

and the accused infringer is held to have infringed claim 1 of patent 3

montysimmons :

such an infringer will also have infringed claim 1 of patent 1

montysimmons :

my opinion

montysimmons :

thus, why I say patent 3 is simply a safety net just in case someone comes up with some previously unknown to you prior art that invalidates claim 1 of patent 1 but not claim 1 of patent 3

montysimmons :

such is also the purpose of dependent claims

Customer:

any overall thoughts, I seem to be short of new questions at the moment- but my own observation is that a prototype is not brain surgery, although it is brain surgery momentarily with regard to crisis management patent evaluation mergers and acquisitions, in the high end legal sphere.

montysimmons :

If you get your system to work and and prove same, it would/will be valuable.

montysimmons :

If your algorithms provide accurate "answers" time after time you software would put lots of attorneys out of business

Customer:

Yes many thanks for your thoughts so far, I am sure I will have many more so long as you are available.

montysimmons :

I hope I have helped.

montysimmons :

I not sure I really give you that much value in the above answers.

Customer:

My thinking is that it is a fast forward for clients and attorneys that enables both to accomplish more and make more $$ at the same time.,

montysimmons :

Yes.

montysimmons :

it will be a good tool

montysimmons :

and there will still be a need to verify the answer is likely correct and in clear error

Customer:

Yes although there are still buggy makers and bugy whip makers int he legal field

Customer:

I hope to char wirth you again!

montysimmons :

yes, those jobs would go away

montysimmons :

you are welcome

montysimmons :

come back anytime.

Customer:

because they are not that valuable at least to the clients

Customer:

bye

montysimmons :

bye, have a good day.

montysimmons, Patent Prosecutor
Satisfied Customers: 230
Experience: Electrical Engineer, South Carolina Attorney, Member of US Patent Bar
montysimmons and 3 other Intellectual Property Law Specialists are ready to help you
Expert:  montysimmons replied 11 months ago.
Our chat has ended, but you can still continue to ask me questions here until you are satisfied with your answer. Come back to this page to view our conversation and any other new information.

What happens now?

If you haven’t already done so, please rate your answer above. Or, you can reply to me using the box below.

JustAnswer in the News:

 
 
 
Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.
 
 
 

What Customers are Saying:

 
 
 
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
< Last | Next >
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
  • My Expert was fast and seemed to have the answer to my taser question at the tips of her fingers. Communication was excellent. I left feeling confident in her answer. Eric Redwood City, CA
  • I am very pleased with JustAnswer as a place to go for divorce or criminal law knowledge and insight. Michael Wichita, KS
  • PaulMJD helped me with questions I had regarding an urgent legal matter. His answers were excellent. Three H. Houston, TX
  • Anne was extremely helpful. Her information put me in the right direction for action that kept me legal, possible saving me a ton of money in the future. Thank you again, Anne!! Elaine Atlanta, GA
  • It worked great. I had the facts and I presented them to my ex-landlord and she folded and returned my deposit. The 50 bucks I spent with you solved my problem. Tony Apopka, FL
  • Wonderful service, prompt, efficient, and accurate. Couldn't have asked for more. I cannot thank you enough for your help. Mary C. Freshfield, Liverpool, UK
 
 
 

Meet The Experts:

 
 
 
  • Alex Reese

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    2588
    Experienced in intellectual property law
< Last | Next >
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/sosolid007/2010-08-05_070536_Suitpic.jpg Alex Reese's Avatar

    Alex Reese

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    2588
    Experienced in intellectual property law
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/scottymacesq/2009-6-10_221523_small.jpg Robert McEwen, Esq.'s Avatar

    Robert McEwen, Esq.

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    387
    Licensed Texas General Practice Attorney
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/tswartz123/2010-02-08_225658_Tommy.jpg Thomas Swartz's Avatar

    Thomas Swartz

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    374
    Twenty one years experience as a lawyer in New York and New Jersey. Former Appellate Law Clerk.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/dkaplun/2009-05-17_173121_headshot_1_2.jpg Dimitry K., Esq.'s Avatar

    Dimitry K., Esq.

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    371
    I assist my clients with IP questions that arise in their daily course of doing business.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/personwilt/2010-1-10_164828_person1.jpg Wilton A. Person's Avatar

    Wilton A. Person

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    339
    MBA, Experienced and Knowledgeable in Intellectual Property Law
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/BA/bart0358/2012-1-23_232424_1056.64x64.JPG BartEsq's Avatar

    BartEsq

    Researcher

    Satisfied Customers:

    192
    Juris Doctor
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/IP/ipesq/2012-1-9_164431_RetouchPortraitHighResCopy.64x64.jpg ipesq's Avatar

    ipesq

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    134
    Specializing in patent prosecution, trademark and copyright registration/enforcement.