Uncle Mike":2nyirptr said:
GreshamH":2nyirptr said:
nice
assumption
Of course it is an assumption, but a reasonable one.
If you want to attack a patent, then the best and cheapest way to do so is find some prior art document that discloses each element of the claim, then file a motion for summary judgement that the patent is invalid. You are fighting an uphill (and more expensive) battle once you need to turn to expert witnesses to fill in the gaps of your attack on the patent.
But I know nothing about this case or the patent, so my comments are general in nature and may not be applicable in this instance.
I think the issue here, that many of us reefers are having, is that Orbitech (or should probably call them Vulturetech ... but I digress
) is suing on a really general patent (using a specific light over an aquarium), instead of actually having any technology or techniques that they actually devised. I'm sure any prior art of "a light" used over an aquarium probably would fit the bill here.
But I dunno, don't moonlights predate the patent? Granted might be fuzzy there whether they "grow" stuff, but if it can be shown that blue LED moonlights do in fact grow stuff that entire patent should be invalid as I was under the impression that you can not file a patent if the item has already been sold to the public.