Print 36 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Dec 22 at 4:02 PM

  (Source: Orion Pictures)
Rejection is still preliminary, just like past rejections

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) Central Reexamination Office (CRO) has damaged Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) legal campaign against rival smartphone maker Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) with its third in a series of major patent rejections in recent months.

On Wednesday, the CRO ruled [PDF] that Apple's "pinch to zoom" patent -- U.S. Patent No. 7,844,915 -- was invalid [PDF].  The patent claims the invention of a number of things multi-touch related -- including being able to distinguish between single finger scrolling gestures and a plurality of multi-finger gestures, including the aforementioned pinch to zoom.

These multi-touch techniques were largely first demonstrated in the 1980s in the world of academia by groups such as Myron Krueger's team at the University of Toronto.  Professor Krueger developed and published papers on virtually equivalent pinch-to-zoom multi-touch technology almost 25 years prior to Apple producing its first multi-touch device (the iPhone). 

Early multitouch devices
Myron Krueger developed pinch-to-zoom [pictured] in the 1980s. [Image Source: Bill Buxton]

The '915 patent joins the "rubber band patent" (U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381, aka the '381 patent) and the "Steve Jobs [multi-touch] patent" (U.S. Patent No. 7,479,949, aka the '949 patent) in patents that were rejected in preliminary rulings by USPTO reviewers.

All three patents will next be headed to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) -- a court of sorts at the USPTO -- for a final ruling.  Assuming the PTAB sticks to its latest decision (which is not guaranteed, but is often the case), the ruling can be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit if Apple chooses.

How critical would it be if these three Apple patents were invalidated? The invalidation would eliminate two out of the three utility patents that Apple asserted in winning a $1.05B USD verdict against Samsung.  As a result the invalidations could slash hundreds of millions of dollars off the damages verdict.

One advantage Apple does have in both the '915 and '381 invalidations is that they are ex parte evaluations; meaning that Apple is the only party the USPTO is discussing the matter with.  Thus it's possible Apple could rectify the language in the patent to be less ambiguous, but in such a way to try to preserve its trial verdict against Samsung.

Also, it should be noted that while all of the patent's 21 claims were rejected, only a single claim -- Claim 8 -- was used in the Samsung case.

Sources: SBNation [The Verge] [PDF] [1], [2]

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Not Fair
By meanleech on 12/20/2012 4:03:07 PM , Rating: -1
Patent can screw but no one can take away the fact that it was Apple's original idea to come up with such a beautiful and powerful phone. Samsung and others are nothing more than cheap copycats...

RE: Not Fair
By retrospooty on 12/20/2012 4:29:29 PM , Rating: 2
Put away the crack pipe man... Its time to clear your head.

RE: Not Fair
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/20/2012 4:41:59 PM , Rating: 3
It's a new account, wonder which one it is.

RE: Not Fair
By retrospooty on 12/20/2012 5:21:33 PM , Rating: 4
Lets just call it TestMessTonTakeJack

RE: Not Fair
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/21/2012 1:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
Yep, and notice who is absent from this post so far? LOL

RE: Not Fair
By retrospooty on 12/21/2012 3:43:53 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Not Fair
By bodar on 12/20/2012 5:01:02 PM , Rating: 3
By that logic, we'd all be driving a Model T2000. Apple should be credited for implementing the capacitive touch screen but that doesn't mean they should have exclusive rights to capacitive touchscreen mobile devices.

RE: Not Fair
By jimbojimbo on 12/21/2012 1:47:35 PM , Rating: 2
That's false as well. There were capacitive touch screen devices before Apple made the iPhone but they just weren't phones.

RE: Not Fair
By sprockkets on 12/21/2012 9:40:59 PM , Rating: 2
Still not right! The first capacitive touch screen phone was the LG Prada.

RE: Not Fair
By retrospooty on 12/22/2012 4:02:20 PM , Rating: 2
Yup... Apple "invented" it afterward and the sued others for copying it LOL. Nutz that anyone beloved Apples lies but people do.

"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki