THE CASE FILE ← back to the site
Chapter IV

Claim 13

The overly broad claim that slipped through, the “direction change” wordsmithing, and the single stroke the whole thing turns on.

9
Dispatch No. 9 — The Overly Broad Claim Slipped Through

No “first,” no “second,” no “third” direction change. No direction change at all.

Dispatch No. 9 · The Overly Broad Claim Slipped Through Read the dispatch →
13
Dispatch No. 13 — You Still Don't Believe Me About the Direction Change Thing?

I call it a “stroke” — and so does every other person of ordinary skill. I even drew a frickin' picture of it.

Dispatch No. 13 · You Still Don't Believe Me About the Direction Change Thing? Read the dispatch →
16
Dispatch No. 16 — Claim 13 — Again

What the actual F#@%? Claim 13, while discussing claims 1 through 7?

Dispatch No. 16 · Claim 13 — Again Read the dispatch →
19
Dispatch No. 19 — Bounding to a single stroke

The problem with these “we painted it orange” patents is they devalue the original.

Dispatch No. 19 · Bounding to a single stroke Read the dispatch →
20
Dispatch No. 20 — New material, not in the disclosure

Imagine if your smoke detector reported your house is not on fire once — and then never checked again.

Dispatch No. 20 · New material, not in the disclosure Read the dispatch →