Latest Salvo in Dr Petty's Purification of Barium Ion Source 13/010,516

[devotEE]

The examiner cited prior art from 1975. We'll see how this one goes.

"No new science."  Maybe not.

Previous discussions on legacy site can be found here.

We are living in a wiggly world.

11% of any quantity is a shit ton.

[Tom Villars]

EEStor fires back at patent examiner Justin Bova.

Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject

It took 3 months for EEStor to reply which is pretty standard but disappointing for anyone hoping to see a speed up in the patent process.

David Kelly from Lighten-The-Load (aka The hire us so we can bad mouth your customers and troll related patents Company) also makes an appearance in the latest IDS.

[Technopete]

Once the patent process is under way and the examiner is considering it then there is every incentive for the applicant to string it out.  You expect to get patent protection (and can cede points to ensure this if you must), but the end date of the protection is a fixed distance from the date the patent is granted.  Therefore if you don't have everything working in production you want the final date of grant to be as far away as possible to milk the proceeds for as long as possible.

It's not surprising that EEStor needs to get rid of Strontium impurities even though Ba and Sr have a similar valence electron configuration.  But the lattice constant of Ba is around 5 Angstroms, but Sr is 6 Angstroms - 20% bigger.  Of course in CMBT Ba and Sr would be in smaller cation form in the crystal.  Nevertheless, a large fraction of a 20% difference could be highly disruptive to the structure.  By contrast Ti and Zr lattice constants differ by only 10% and the ion sizes differ by 5%.

Regards,

Peter

[devotEE]

http://tinyurl.com/3gxrgmr

A link to a review

_____________________________
*) Corresponding author: [e-mail]
doi: 10.2298/SOS0803235V
UDK 519.718:553.689
History and Challenges of Barium Titanate: Part II
M. M. Vijatović*), J. D. Bobić, B. D. Stojanović
Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, Kneza Višeslava 1, Belgrade, Serbia

Nice review.

Now, why is purity important?

Why design for 0.6 to 0.7 micron?

What happens at those non existent domain walls?

What (again) is the purpose of the Al2O3?

Why design for cubic perovskite?

What was that resistivity again, and how pure was that sample?

"What is the MATRIX"?

We are definitely "living in a wiggly world".

[Tom Villars]

Technopete said:

Once the patent process is under way and the examiner is considering it then there is every incentive for the applicant to string it out.  You expect to get patent protection (and can cede points to ensure this if you must), but the end date of the protection is a fixed distance from the date the patent is granted.  Therefore if you don't have everything working in production you want the final date of grant to be as far away as possible to milk the proceeds for as long as possible.

...

That was true a long time ago but now patent protection is based off the date of the application not the date it was granted/allowed.  Only reason for EEStor to drag this out is to ensure they get the best claims possible.

[PaulCummings55]

Thank you for answering my question before I typed it!  I thought this was the case, from previous posts on the old site.  I wonder if DW already has in place replacement patents for the ones that are oldest?

Tom Villars said:

Technopete said:

Once the patent process is under way and the examiner is considering it then there is every incentive for the applicant to string it out.  You expect to get patent protection (and can cede points to ensure this if you must), but the end date of the protection is a fixed distance from the date the patent is granted.  Therefore if you don't have everything working in production you want the final date of grant to be as far away as possible to milk the proceeds for as long as possible.

...

That was true a long time ago but now patent protection is based off the date of the application not the date it was granted/allowed.  Only reason for EEStor to drag this out is to ensure they get the best claims possible.

[DAP]

No, a patent expires 20 years from the date of filing of the earliest application the patent claims priority to, without considering whatever adjustments or extensions may apply.  It is actually in the applicant's best interest to respond within the set deadlines and not string out the prosecution with extensions because that extented time counts against you in the calculation of whatever patent term adjustment you may acrue due to tardy action by the patent office.

Technopete said:

Once the patent process is under way and the examiner is considering it then there is every incentive for the applicant to string it out.  You expect to get patent protection (and can cede points to ensure this if you must), but the end date of the protection is a fixed distance from the date the patent is granted.  ...

[Tom Villars]

EEStor follow up reply

[rt]

Link doesn't work for me

Tom Villars said:

EEStor follow up reply

[Eenigma]

Worked for me RT, however here is the direct link.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4WeNSIdyoHmZi1kOFJ6bExGM0k/edit?pli=1

rt said:

Link doesn't work for me

Tom Villars said:

EEStor follow up reply

[rt]

Thanks, it was taking me to a google storage signup page.

[Tom Villars]

Final Rejection was entered on July 29, 2012 but has not yet been mailed.  We'll probably see the document early next week.

[Tom Villars]

The paperwork was posted today.