Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Cymer (CYMI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (19265)	9/2/1998 5:09:00 PM
From: BillyG	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 25960

Maybe I should start over guys. My post was difficult to understand. 1. Anyone can formally request that the Patent Office reexamine an issued patent. 2. The basis for reexamination is "prior art" that is submitted with the request and may invalidate one of the patent claims or "raise a substantial new question of patentability." An example of prior art is a technical article that pre-dates the filing date of the patent and describes the invention claimed in the patent. The prior art must be different from the prior art that was reviewed by the Patent Office when it granted the patent. 3. The Patent Office reviews the reexamination request and the new prior art. After review, the Patent Office decides whether or not it will reexamine the patent. 4. At this point, there has only been a "request" for reexamination of the CYMI patent. The Patent Office has not granted the request. 5. The result of reexamination may be that: (a) nothing happens and the patent survives as it was originally issued by the Patent Office; (b) some or all of the patent claims are invalidated because of the new prior art; and/or (c) some or all of the patent claims are revised to avoid the new prior art. 6. If the patent owner requests reexamination, it is usually fairly confident that its patent will survive the reexamination process, or it is testing its patent against newly discovered prior art. 7. If someone other than the patent owner requests reexamination, it is probably because they are arguably infringing the patent. The reexamination request may be a negotiation tactic, an inexpensive alternative to litigation, or a legitimate request. 8. The reexamination process generally favors the patent owner. What this means for CYMI: 1. It means that CYMI is out there enforcing its patents against potential competitors. 2. It means that at least one potential competitor is arguably infringing CYMI's patent. 3. It means that this patent, if it is reexamined by the Patent Office, will be tested without the expense of litigation. If the patent survives reexamination, then it will be viewed as "stronger" than a patent that has not been tested. If the patent does not survive reexamination, then the patent probably had problems that would have resulted in it being invalidated during litigation. A patent that survives reexamination can then be used during litigation with the argument that "the patent is valid because the Patent Office examined it twice." This is my quick take on the subject, not investment advice, a legal opinion, etc. As always, do your own due diligentce.