SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA)
AMPX 12.44-8.4%3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Wayne Umfleet who wrote (20)6/20/1997 3:24:00 AM
From: Merlin   of 17679
 
Wayne,

The "prosecution" of the patent refers to the process of making a patent application and having it examined by the Patent Office. The amendment of claims that are rejected is done in order to obtain allowable claims so that a patent can issue. Claims can be rejected for a multitude of reasons. Prosecution history estoppel is directed specifically to those claims that have been amended due to prior art rejections by the examiner. The claims and amendments in question were all settled years ago, prior to the patent being issued.

If Ampex has relied upon the doctrine of equivalents, they will have to be able show that the claims in question were not amended in order to overcome prior art rejections. If they kept a file with the office actions and their subsequent amendments, this should be relatively easy to determine. At this point, I am not even sure that Ampex is relying upon the doctrine of equivalents.

Regards,

Merlin
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News