The value of the Rush Poker patent to its holder?

[DonkeyQuixote]

In another thread, on Nevada, an issue arose of the value to Stars for buying the Rush Poker "patent", (the status of which I do not know).

Does anyone here know the status of the patent ?

Has its validity been upheld/challenged ?

[ERGOPHOBIA]

The real question is will FTP sue pokerstars over their obvious patend infringement

[lilwhaldo]

The patent was in the process of being approved. After Full Tilt was indicted, the patent was denied. Pokerstars has zoom, which, by all accounts, is quite a bit like rush poker.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by lilwhaldo

The patent was in the process of being approved. After Full Tilt was indicted, the patent was denied. Pokerstars has zoom, which, by all accounts, is quite a bit like rush poker.

Really ? The patent application was denied ? That would mean there IS NO patent asset to transfer then. That is interesting.

Any cite or link to a denial of the patent ? What grounds ?

I found another thread which discussed the staus of the process as of December, courtesy of Rizeeedizee:

"It turns out that the application was examined and "rejected", which resulted in the applicant filing something called a "Request for Continued Examination" back in 2009. The application was docketed to an Examiner in June 2011, but it's still in limbo. "

Thanks for the information, btw.

DQ

[sba9630]

From the FTP website:

Patent Pending

The Rush Poker Game is the subject of the following patents and/or patent applications:

US Patent Application: US2007/0155460

European Patent Application: EP1968720 (effective also for Isle of Mann, and to be registered also in Jersey, Guernsey, and Gibraltar)

European Patent Application, application number: 10250085.7 (effective also for Isle of Mann, and to be registered also in Jersey, Guernsey, and Gibraltar)

Australian Patent Application: AU2006333559

Canadian Patent Application: CA2632291

Full Tilt Poker, its Affiliates and/or its Parent Company will take vigorous legal action against any infringement of their patent rights.


I haven't researched any of these yet.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by sba9630

From the FTP website:

Patent Pending

The Rush Poker Game is the subject of the following patents and/or patent applications:

US Patent Application: US2007/0155460

European Patent Application: EP1968720 (effective also for Isle of Mann, and to be registered also in Jersey, Guernsey, and Gibraltar)

European Patent Application, application number: 10250085.7 (effective also for Isle of Mann, and to be registered also in Jersey, Guernsey, and Gibraltar)

Australian Patent Application: AU2006333559

Canadian Patent Application: CA2632291

Full Tilt Poker, its Affiliates and/or its Parent Company will take vigorous legal action against any infringement of their patent rights.


I haven't researched any of these yet.

Thanks. (I am in the US today, which means my prior attempt to access the FTP website was still roadblocked.)

Those all appear to be applications, with the US application reportedly having been rejected and docketed for review (?), as of June, 2011.

(Looking at the overall FTP assets segment of the deal this way, in any event .... the value to this buyer seemingly beats the similarly sized deal whereby IGT paid $500Million+ for DoubleDown Casino...)

[sba9630]

Bibliographic Data [uspto.gov]

11/316,573 Computer gaming device and method for computer gaming 080633.0102

Status Date: 01-05-2010

Status: Docketed New Case - Ready for Examination

Originally Posted by Rizzeedizzee

I stand somewhat corrected. It turns out that the application was examined and "rejected", which resulted in the applicant filing something called a "Request for Continued Examination" back in 2009. The application was docketed to an Examiner in June 2011, but it's still in limbo. This is why the Public PAIR (http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair) indication is "Docketed New Case - Ready for Examination", which is also what it would say if the application had never been examined in the first place.

[sba9630]

Transaction History

Date	Transaction Description
03-22-2012	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-22-2012	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-26-2012	Reference capture on IDS
01-26-2012	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-26-2012	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
08-19-2011	Reference capture on IDS
08-19-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
08-19-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
06-23-2011	Reference capture on IDS
06-23-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
06-23-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
06-02-2011	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
06-02-2011	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
03-28-2011	Miscellaneous Incoming Letter
03-28-2011	Statement Filed Indicating a Loss of Entitlement to Small Entity Status
03-02-2011	Reference capture on IDS
03-02-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-02-2011	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
10-07-2010	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
06-10-2010	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
05-20-2010	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
01-05-2010	Date Forwarded to Examiner
12-21-2009	Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
01-05-2010	Disposal for a RCE / CPA / R129
12-21-2009	Workflow - Request for RCE - Begin
11-18-2009	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
09-24-2009	Date Forwarded to Examiner
09-22-2009	Amendment after Final Rejection
06-22-2009	Electronic Review
06-22-2009	Email Notification
06-22-2009	Restart Response of action
06-11-2009	Electronic Review
06-11-2009	Email Notification
06-10-2009	Mail Final Rejection (PTOL - 326)
06-08-2009	Final Rejection
03-25-2009	Date Forwarded to Examiner
03-16-2009	Response after Non-Final Action
03-05-2009	Email Notification
03-05-2009	Mail Examiner Interview Summary (PTOL - 413)
02-24-2009	Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
12-16-2008	Electronic Review
12-16-2008	Email Notification
12-16-2008	Mail Non-Final Rejection
12-08-2008	Non-Final Rejection
12-20-2005	Information Disclosure Statement considered
10-09-2007	Information Disclosure Statement considered
10-17-2007	Withdraw Flagged for 5/25
10-09-2007	Reference capture on IDS
10-09-2007	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
10-15-2007	Flagged for 5/25
10-09-2007	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
07-05-2007	PG-Pub Issue Notification
06-25-2007	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
03-30-2007	Miscellaneous Incoming Letter
03-01-2007	Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
12-05-2006	IFW TSS Processing by Tech Center Complete
12-20-2005	Reference capture on IDS
12-20-2005	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
12-20-2005	Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-13-2006	Application Dispatched from OIPE
03-14-2006	Application Is Now Complete
03-10-2006	Cleared by OIPE CSR
01-07-2006	IFW Scan & PACR Auto Security Review
12-20-2005	Initial Exam Team nn

[DonkeyQuixote]

Why this subject possibly matters:

Imagine the following hypothetical discussions ...

PStars: "Hey, AGA, we want to get Nevada approval as a supplier, so we can partner up with one of your members."

AGA: "Sorry, that ain't gonna happen"

PStars: "Too bad, because unless we get licensed, your Nevada licensee members can't contract with us to license Rush Poker or use anything which might infringe upon our patent. Sorry, I have another call from coming in from COPA .... Can we talk later ?"

AGA: "Okay, I see, I'll get back to you."

...... AGA memo to Hill lobbyists, possible tactics .... ?

(A) "Please insert an FTP assets poison pill into Reid 2012", or
(B) "Please ensure that the subject of licensing software is left to only "qualified regulators", or
(C) "Please modify the BF poison pill in Reid 2012 until after a two year period passes" ?

This is purely a hypothetical, but it is not beyond possiblity. (I recall from ancient history when one of my clients was fighting with Carl Icahn, someone managed to insert a poison pill into a bill that effectively tainted anything Mr. Icahn owned/controlled, potentially blowing up a sale of the Travel Channel. Looked like a bill of attainder, but the matter settled thereafter.)

[raradevils]

Originally Posted by ERGOPHOBIA

The real question is will FTP sue pokerstars over their obvious patend infringement

Doesn't pokerstars now own FTP? So would they not also own or at the very least have rites to their patten?

[lilwhaldo]

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Really ? The patent application was denied ? That would mean there IS NO patent asset to transfer then. That is interesting.

Any cite or link to a denial of the patent ? What grounds ?

I found another thread which discussed the staus of the process as of December, courtesy of Rizeeedizee:

"It turns out that the application was examined and "rejected", which resulted in the applicant filing something called a "Request for Continued Examination" back in 2009. The application was docketed to an Examiner in June 2011, but it's still in limbo. "

Thanks for the information, btw.

DQ

I remember reading a while ago it was denied or put on hold until the end of the proceedings to do with the indictment. This of course could have been bs. I don't remember where I read it though.

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by raradevils

Doesn't pokerstars now own FTP? So would they not also own or at the very least have rites to their patten?

That is correct.

I took the smiley face to mean that in calling it the "real" question, he was making fun of the announced decision to keep them separate post-acquistion.

[DrewOnTilt]

Originally Posted by ERGOPHOBIA

The real question is will FTP sue pokerstars over their obvious patend infringement

Originally Posted by raradevils

Doesn't pokerstars now own FTP? So would they not also own or at the very least have rites to their patten?

[tamiller866]

The patent(s) are specificly listed as assets transferred to PS within the settlement:

US patent application no. 11/316,573
PCT application no. PCT/US2006!0390B6, by means of
which the following applications were filed:
(i)
Australia patent application no. 2006333559
(ii)
Canada patent application no. 2632291
(iii) EPO patent application no. 06836201.1
(all listed under the name of Hold 'Em One, Inc. as the
applicant (Assignee in the US»,

[PokerXanadu]

Originally Posted by tamiller866

The patent applications(s) are specificly listed as assets transferred to PS within the settlement:

FYP.