Patent attorney Horstemeyer alleges defamation by EFF "Stupid Patent" post
According to a post at EFF, patent attorney Scott A. Horstemeyer has sued the Electronic Frontier Foundation alleging that he was defamed by the April 2015 Stupid Patent of the Month blog post.
EFF noted:
We are very disappointed that an attorney would attempt to silence criticism with misguided and counterproductive litigation, and will defend against this lawsuit vigorously. As our counsel at the law firm of Bryan Cave have explained to Horstemeyer, there were no false facts in the post to retract or correct, and the opinions expressed are protected by the Constitution.
link to EFF: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/eff-sued-defamation-patent-lawyer-aprils-stupid-patent-month-scott-horstemeyer
The EFF post includes a link to a letter TO EFF FROM an attorney representing Horstemeyer [one Sanford J. Asman ]
The patent in question is US Patent No. 9,013,334 AND paragraphs of the EFF post at issue are:
We think that all of Eclipse’s patents deserve a stupid patent of the month award. But the ’334 patent is especially deserving. This is because the Patent Office issued this patent after a federal court invalidated similar claims from other patents in the same family. On September 4, 2014, Judge Wu of the Central District of California issued an order invalidating claims from three of Eclipse’s patents. The court explained that these patents claim abstract ideas like checking to see if a task has been completed. Judge Wu applied the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank and held the claims invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act.
All of Eclipse’s patents were both “invented” and prosecuted by a patent attorney named Scott Horstemeyer (who just so happens to have prosecuted Arrivalstar’s patents too). Patent applicants and their attorneys have an ethical obligation to disclose any information material to patentability. Despite this, from what we can tell from the Patent Office’s public access system PAIR, Horstemeyer did not disclose Judge Wu’s decision to the examiner during the prosecution of the ’334 patent, even though the decision invalidated claims in the patent family. While Horstemeyer has not made any genuine contribution to notification “technology,” he has shown advanced skill at gaming the patent system.
link: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/stupid-patent-month-eclipse-ip-casts-shadow-over-innovation
EFF noted:
We are very disappointed that an attorney would attempt to silence criticism with misguided and counterproductive litigation, and will defend against this lawsuit vigorously. As our counsel at the law firm of Bryan Cave have explained to Horstemeyer, there were no false facts in the post to retract or correct, and the opinions expressed are protected by the Constitution.
link to EFF: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/eff-sued-defamation-patent-lawyer-aprils-stupid-patent-month-scott-horstemeyer
The EFF post includes a link to a letter TO EFF FROM an attorney representing Horstemeyer [one Sanford J. Asman ]
The patent in question is US Patent No. 9,013,334 AND paragraphs of the EFF post at issue are:
We think that all of Eclipse’s patents deserve a stupid patent of the month award. But the ’334 patent is especially deserving. This is because the Patent Office issued this patent after a federal court invalidated similar claims from other patents in the same family. On September 4, 2014, Judge Wu of the Central District of California issued an order invalidating claims from three of Eclipse’s patents. The court explained that these patents claim abstract ideas like checking to see if a task has been completed. Judge Wu applied the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank and held the claims invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act.
All of Eclipse’s patents were both “invented” and prosecuted by a patent attorney named Scott Horstemeyer (who just so happens to have prosecuted Arrivalstar’s patents too). Patent applicants and their attorneys have an ethical obligation to disclose any information material to patentability. Despite this, from what we can tell from the Patent Office’s public access system PAIR, Horstemeyer did not disclose Judge Wu’s decision to the examiner during the prosecution of the ’334 patent, even though the decision invalidated claims in the patent family. While Horstemeyer has not made any genuine contribution to notification “technology,” he has shown advanced skill at gaming the patent system.
link: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/stupid-patent-month-eclipse-ip-casts-shadow-over-innovation
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 6:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home