Petty to get EEStor patent

[Jambon]

Petty's patent application has be allowed, which means a new patent can be expected in three months.

12/885,290      SELECTIVE-CATION-REMOVAL PURIFICATION OF ALUMINUM SOURCE

03-12-2012     Electronic Review
03-09-2012     Email Notification
03-09-2012     Mail Notice of Allowance
03-06-2012     Document Verification
03-06-2012     Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
03-06-2012     Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
03-05-2012     Reasons for Allowance
01-24-2012     Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
07-19-2011     Email Notification

[Yukon]

So is it 9 approved now? 

[Jambon]

That is eight patents and one awaiting a "coronation" date and payment of fees due.

[Jambon]

Smooth sailing for this patent. It took 536 days to go from it's application date to approval date.

[jnissen]

So another powder purity patent... I can predict the anticipated announcement on third party approval. Now the powder is proved to be 99.9999 pure instead of 99.999 like we previously verified.  LOL LOL

[InWDC]

Not so LOL, maybe.

Why would Zenn need someone "very knowledgeable in the space" to certify energy density?  One clever guy with a multimeter could do that.  

So maybe they will not demo energy density.  Maybe they will just do another powder purity verification or capacitance test.  This would be a devastating indication of a lack of ED to show.

The only other reason they might need someone knowledgeable in the space would be if the tester was to verify that the high ED components came off the assembly line.  That would be great.

jnissen said:

So another powder purity patent... I can predict the anticipated announcement on third party approval. Now the powder is proved to be 99.9999 pure instead of 99.999 like we previously verified.  LOL LOL

[Tom Villars]

Looks like EEStor decided to start over on this application as they filed a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) on June 5, 2012.  Since they had received a Notice of allowance on March 9, 2012 they must have found something in the references cited in the IDS they also filed on June 5th.

June 5 Filings

DAP any idea why would they do this?  I did notice David Kelly is mentioned several times in the IDS.

[Prof Neilson]

DAP 

Is the new patent law in play here with foreign prior art being disclosed?

Thanks

[DAP]

Tom/Paul,

Eestor's attorney likely started filed an RCE in order to introduce prior art references that were not disclosed in the first examination leading up to allowance into the record.  This is a CYA move because if such references are not disclosed and it can be shown that someone in Eestor's IP chain (DW, DW's lawyers, etc.) knew about those references before allowance, this could then serve as a basis for a charge of inequitable conduct. 

dp

Tom Villars said:

Looks like EEStor decided to start over on this application as they filed a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) on June 5, 2012.  Since they had received a Notice of allowance on March 9, 2012 they must have found something in the references cited in the IDS they also filed on June 5th.

June 5 Filings

DAP any idea why would they do this?  I did notice David Kelly is mentioned several times in the IDS.

[Tom Villars]

DAP looks like you were right as after introducing the prior art, they have once again been granted a Notice of Allowance.

Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (2012-06-14)