Maybe I am wrong?

The SG patent referred to is 95940 and has an application number of 200301820-7. Now checking on the IPOS site, it looks like the one I spent time looking at 200503881-5 was not the one in question. Thanks to Stephan in pointing it out.

In any case, I think this patent troll should just be ignored. There is enough prior art to make this patent invalid.

Leave a Reply