turtle617's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/user/848457/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/1452911/comments?source=feed#comment-19112821 19112821 Wed, 22 May 2013 09:28:03 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1393911/comments?source=feed#comment-18403191 18403191
For example, real lawyers wouldn't publish something repeatedly referring to a judge by just their first and/or last name. Any lawyer with even a morsel of litigation experience knows that "overruled" is not spelled "over-ruled."

These aren't big deals or even noticeable to the lay reader, but to me, it puts your supposed qualifications in doubt.]]> Fri, 03 May 2013 10:45:32 -0400
For example, real lawyers wouldn't publish something repeatedly referring to a judge by just their first and/or last name. Any lawyer with even a morsel of litigation experience knows that "overruled" is not spelled "over-ruled."

These aren't big deals or even noticeable to the lay reader, but to me, it puts your supposed qualifications in doubt.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1316901/comments?source=feed#comment-17162201 17162201
Are you implying that Vringo has to pay $1,000/hour for the duration of the 60 days? Yeah, litigators may want to litigate, but they also work at the whim of their client, and if their client wants to take a 60 day timeout, then that's what Dickstein Shapiro will do.

And how does that give away any advantage?]]> Wed, 03 Apr 2013 10:18:03 -0400
Are you implying that Vringo has to pay $1,000/hour for the duration of the 60 days? Yeah, litigators may want to litigate, but they also work at the whim of their client, and if their client wants to take a 60 day timeout, then that's what Dickstein Shapiro will do.

And how does that give away any advantage?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1095131/comments?source=feed#comment-13307571 13307571 Fri, 04 Jan 2013 12:42:14 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1062291/comments?source=feed#comment-12561511 12561511 Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:43:27 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/910491/comments?source=feed#comment-10286921 10286921 Mon, 08 Oct 2012 11:43:10 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/848511/comments?source=feed#comment-9125341 9125341 Wed, 05 Sep 2012 18:57:05 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/794601/comments?source=feed#comment-8297701 8297701
As a patent attorney, this is just not true. Just because the USPTO did not cite a certain prior art reference is not an assertion that the PTO did not find it relevant. All it means is that the PTO never considered that reference. Relevance has nothing to do with it. The PTO overlooks references all the time. That's why we have re-examinations.]]> Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:45:33 -0400
As a patent attorney, this is just not true. Just because the USPTO did not cite a certain prior art reference is not an assertion that the PTO did not find it relevant. All it means is that the PTO never considered that reference. Relevance has nothing to do with it. The PTO overlooks references all the time. That's why we have re-examinations.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/794601/comments?source=feed#comment-8260111 8260111 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 16:11:36 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/786681/comments?source=feed#comment-8178781 8178781
That being said, I believe highly in the value of VHC patents, just not for the reasons mentioned in your comment.]]> Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:09:55 -0400
That being said, I believe highly in the value of VHC patents, just not for the reasons mentioned in your comment.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/739841/comments?source=feed#comment-7670771 7670771
"One extremely important fact for shareholders is that Donald Stout was an examiner at the US patent office, and he knows patents like very few attorneys ever could."

I don't doubt that Mr. Stout is a very knowledgeable and competent attorney. However, simply being a (former) patent examiner does not in itself make one some sort of superior expert when it comes to patents, as the article suggests. Patent Examiners are often hired straight out of undergrad and given a few months of training on patent laws before they begin examining patent applications. Their work is thoroughly scrutinized by supervisory examiners before being published. Many patent examiners leave after a year or two for law school, graduate school, or law firms without ever obtaining the in-depth knowledge and experience that would make them understand patents "like few attorneys ever could."

Mr. Stout might have obtained this level of knowledge from his days working at the patent office, but I wouldn't just assume it to risk exaggerating his credentials. ]]> Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:35:48 -0400
"One extremely important fact for shareholders is that Donald Stout was an examiner at the US patent office, and he knows patents like very few attorneys ever could."

I don't doubt that Mr. Stout is a very knowledgeable and competent attorney. However, simply being a (former) patent examiner does not in itself make one some sort of superior expert when it comes to patents, as the article suggests. Patent Examiners are often hired straight out of undergrad and given a few months of training on patent laws before they begin examining patent applications. Their work is thoroughly scrutinized by supervisory examiners before being published. Many patent examiners leave after a year or two for law school, graduate school, or law firms without ever obtaining the in-depth knowledge and experience that would make them understand patents "like few attorneys ever could."

Mr. Stout might have obtained this level of knowledge from his days working at the patent office, but I wouldn't just assume it to risk exaggerating his credentials. ]]>