USPTO Makes Preliminary Move to Kill Apple's Rubber Band Patent
October 24, 2012 11:00 AM
comment(s) - last by
Decision could play a crucial role in Apple v. Samsung
Apple, Inc. (
) scored quite the coup when it in essence patented the animation of a naturally occurring phenomenon --
the transient response
. The company's so-called "rubber band" patent, describes multiple methods of making graphical actions over-stretch, then bounce back, say when scrolling or zooming. Apple has used the patent to
sue many of its rivals
The patent --
U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381
-- played a key role as one of four technology patents asserted by Apple in its
market-shaking $1.05B USD jury verdict
against Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (
). But those happy days may be at end as the
United States Patent and Trademark Office
ruled that it was invalid on grounds of lacking novelty and being obvious based on a pair of previous patents.
The first was a patent "Controlling Content Display" "invented" by Luigi Lira and AOL, Inc. in March of 2003. That patent was filed with the
World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO) as is numbered
WO 03/081458 A1
Central Reexamination Division
at the USPTO ruled that in light of Lira, the rubber band patent was too "obvious" and lacking in novelty ("anticipated by Lira").
The patent by Mr. Lira discusses a similar bounce, but with the mouse as the input, not the finger.
Ironically, one of Apple's own patents was used in the invalidation as well --
U.S. Patent No. 7,786,975
-- which covers "Continuous Scrolling With Acceleration".
Samsung has filed a copy of the invalidation with
U.S. District Court for the District of Northern California
Judge Lucy Koh
, who presided over its jury trial versus Apple. In light of invalidation Samsung's Rule 50 ("overrule-the-jury") motion asks the federal judge to vacate the massive damages.
Bounce on the HTC EVO 4G
Samsung is also
appealing the rest of the verdict
This may not be the end of the story, though, when it comes to the rubber band patent. The Central Reexamination Office's ruling is non-binding -- it could reconsider it pending Apple's appeal. Even if it does stamp it invalid, the matter then has to go to the
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
(PTAB) -- a court of sorts at the USPTO -- for a final ruling. And even if the PTAB invalidates the patent, the ruling can be appealed to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
That said, invalidations often stick, and the preliminary ruling has the potential to already mar Apple's greatest verdict against Android.
a statement to
The New York Times
, Android operating system-maker Google Inc. (
) gloated, "The patent office plays a critical role in ensuring that overly broad patents cannot be used to limit consumer choice. We appreciate the care the patent office has taken in re-examining dubious software claims."
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Get rid of corporate patents?
10/26/2012 12:15:08 AM
Only allow individuals to patent things, and require that they license those patented things to all interested parties.
That means no free and no solely controlled patents for any corporation, even if the individuals work for that corporation.
If companies want new things to develop, they'll have to cooperate by funding a non-profit that the individuals can use to develop new things to patent. The amount of funding a corporation contributes will relate to the rate they can license the patented thing at. The more money they put toward its creation, the better the licensing deal will be.
The incentive will still be there to innovate, but corporations won't be able to troll because everyone will benefit from those innovations. Plus, individuals will not have their inventions robbed by unscrupulous businesses.
Possibly provide government staff to help individuals write patents, so they don't need to be sponsored by massive corporations. Use Watson-style technology to rid the patent system of duplicates and frivolous patents, check for prior art, and such. Put some money and effort into this.
"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs
"Appleflation": Apple's Anti-Android Win Could Limit Consumer Choice
August 27, 2012, 11:30 AM
Doomsday for Samsung in U.S., Jury Rules it Slavishly Infringed Apple's Patents
August 24, 2012, 5:56 PM
Samsung Modifies Its Hardware, Software to Try to Appease Apple
October 20, 2011, 6:00 PM
Sony Finally Adds 3D Blu-ray Support to PS4
July 24, 2014, 3:44 PM
IDC: Although Apple Remains at Top of Tablet Market, Share Falls from 33% to 26.9%
July 24, 2014, 1:24 PM
Thanks in Part to Strong G3 Launch, LG Sells 14.5 Million Smartphones in Q2
July 24, 2014, 10:18 AM
4.7" Samsung Galaxy Alpha Smartphone Coming Next Month
July 24, 2014, 8:28 AM
Report: Apple to Launch 12" Retina MacBook Air, 4K Desktop Product Later this Year
July 24, 2014, 4:33 AM
Apple iPhone Sales Rise Nearly 50 Percent in China for Fiscal Q3 2014
July 24, 2014, 2:04 AM
Most Popular Articles
Microsoft Kills Entertainment Unit, May Shelve Flagship Lumia "McLaren"
July 18, 2014, 7:40 PM
JJ Abrams Unveils X-Wing Starfighter for New "Star Wars" Movie
July 21, 2014, 12:24 PM
Boeing 777 Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 Crashes in Ukraine
July 17, 2014, 1:00 PM
Ford Details ’15 F-150’s 325hp, 2.7L EcoBoost V6; Demonstrates 732-lb Weight Loss
July 22, 2014, 6:55 PM
Toyota Scientist: Autonomous Vehicles May Lead to Increased Fuel Consumption, Pollution
July 18, 2014, 2:42 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Space Terrorism is a Looming Threat For the United States
Apr 23, 2014, 7:47 PM
Facebook Aims to Provide Internet to "Every Person in the World" with Drones, Satellites
Apr 1, 2014, 10:20 AM
Retail Mobile Sites Experience Outages in Light of Simplexity's Bankruptcy
Mar 14, 2014, 8:48 AM
Tesla vs. BMW: Who Has the Safer EV?
Feb 1, 2014, 2:56 PM
Justice Leaks Details of Next HTC One Two Flagship Phone
Dec 5, 2013, 4:04 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information