ass=”alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-1402″ title=”denied” src=”https://www.patentspostgrant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/denied-150×150.jpg” alt=”denied” width=”85″ height=”88″ />As first reported by PatentsPostGrant.com in November 2009, the patent reexaminations of NTP vs. RIM infamy were soundly shot down by the BPAI. In November of 2009, the BPAI began issuing a series of decisions affirming the rejections of the five NTP patents.
5,436,960 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
5,819,172 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
6,317,592 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
6,067,451 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
5,625,670 BPAI reexamination opinion (90/007,723)
As expected, in December of 2009, NTP requested the BPAI rehear arguments in these cases. Earlier this month, the BPAI, in tersely worded responses, denied rehearing in the ’592 ‘172, and ‘960 patents. As the issues in the ‘670 and ‘451 patent are common, namely, consideration of certain declaration and the public availability of certain prior art, it is expected that the remaining two denials will follow shortly. Next stop for NTP is the Federal Circuit.
The Federal Circuit will be quite busy with NTP in the coming months. In addition to the five patents noted above, NTP has two additional appeals from the BPAI headed to the court.
5,438,611 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
-(CAFC appeal noticed 1/26/10)
5,479,472 BPAI reexamination opinion (link)
-(Rehearing denied 2/5/10)
NTP patent, 5,438,611 appears to be out in front of the pack of (7) appeals, with the first formal CAFC appeal notice filed this past January. The ‘611 Patent, and NTP patent 5,479,472 were asserted against Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T and Palm, in 2006. As with the five patents above, the BPAI mostly affirmed the rejections applied in reexamination.
 Rejection of all claims were affirmed in 6,317,592, 5,819,172, and 6,067,451; Rejections were affirmed-in-part in 5,436,960 and 5,625,670, (the surviving ‘670 claims appear to have been added in reexamination, claim 15 of the ‘960 appears to be the only surviving claim successfully asserted against RIM)