DIY PneuMags & PTP

[craltal]

So PTP and DW are forced to go after every DIY PneuMag maker like the RIAA goes after illegal downloaders?

no, but as patent holders, they have the right to

[RogueFactor]

All this, of course, means nothing until a patent is granted to Forest Hatcher(aka PTP) for a pneumatically assisted trigger mechanism.

PTP
At this point, the only patent PTP has been granted is with claims to a magnetically assisted trigger mechanism(US Patent # 6,802,305 )

Claims 16-27 were required to file separately. These claims, of which at least 2 are pneumatic claims, have twice been non-final rejected requiring revision, and at least 1 is still pending revision due to the most recent non-final rejection(Patent Application # 10/912,269) ...

DeadlyWind
On the other hand, DeadlyWind/Colin was granted his patent earlier this year, without issue...US Patent # 6,990,971

These are the facts. And with these links, anyone can verify this to be true for themselves.

[Pneumagger]

so what happens if you're filing a patent and someone is makinging your idea befor the actual "issue" date of your patent.

[robnix]

so what happens if you're filing a patent and someone is makinging your idea befor the actual "issue" date of your patent.

Prior art may come into effect, especially if you knew of the existence of the invention beforehand.

[RRfireblade]

All this, of course, means nothing until a patent is granted to Forest Hatcher(aka PTP) for a pneumatically assisted trigger mechanism.

PTP
At this point, the only patent PTP has been granted is with claims to a magnetically assisted trigger mechanism(US Patent # 6,802,305 )

Claims 16-27 were required to file separately. These claims, of which at least 2 are pneumatic claims, have twice been non-final rejected requiring revision, and at least 1 is still pending revision due to the most recent non-final rejection(Patent Application # 10/912,269) ...

DeadlyWind
On the other hand, DeadlyWind/Colin was granted his patent earlier this year, without issue...US Patent # 6,990,971

These are the facts. And with these links, anyone can verify this to be true for themselves.

Unless I'm mistaken since I'm not "The Patent guy" , those are two completely seperate applications.

The Granted patent states clearly in the very first paragraph as well as later in the descriptions....

A mechanical, pneumatic, magnetic and/or electronic method for assisting the user operation of a trigger and/or actively and rapidly returning the trigger mechanism to its firing position at the completion of a firing sequence in a paintball gun. The trigger assistance mechanism reduces the amount of force required by the user to move the trigger to begin the firing sequence. After the firing sequence has been completed, the trigger assistance mechanism provides assistance to the trigger to move it to its pre-firing resting position. Alternatively, the trigger assistance mechanism replaces the mechanical linkage between the trigger and the cocking/firing mechanism of the paintball gun such that a pneumatic actuating ram is used to initiate the cocking/firing sequence.

The present invention generally relates to a mechanism for assisting the user in the operation of a trigger in a gun mechanism. More specifically, the present invention relates to a mechanical, pneumatic, magnetic or electronic method for assisting the user in the operation of a trigger and/or actively and rapidly returning the trigger mechanism to its firing position at the completion of a firing sequence for use with a paintball gun.

I'm not quite sure why these two get confused since they were filed like 3 years apart or something.

My 'guess' and 'asumption' on my part is.....

That the second patent was the application that PTP filed to cover thier Emag design that was respectfully given to AGD , in which Tom later deceided to let die. I'm not really sure though other than I belive it was filed under electronic.

As for DW's Patent it seems obvious that thier claims are covered in PTPs Patent and as is often the case ( Sp Anyone? ) the USPTO examiner simply dropped the ball on his part of the research. Only a court case could clear up thier standings at this point.

[Chronobreak]

:slips jay a note under the table:

"this threads getting good"

:re subscribed:

[RRfireblade]

Regardless , a division makes them seperate applications.... now.

And...


Regardless , the granted patent includes all applicable coverage.

[nicad]

Unless I'm mistaken since I'm not "The Patent guy" , those are two completely separate applications.

Jay, If you are not the patent guy, why are you stating things with such authority?
You know full well that the USPTO made PTP split out the pneumatic CLAIMS into a divisional. Even rabidchihauhau referred to it:

The patent office screwed us - plain and simple, first denying the app, then relenting, making us submit multiple apps (they failed to understand the transportability aspect) and delayed us 4+ years.

The Granted patent states clearly in the very first paragraph as well as later in the descriptions....

You also know full well, if it is not covered in a claim, it is not covered in the patent. Yes, all the other data helps support the claims and make them stronger, but if it is not claimed, it is not covered. Are you a patent guy or not?

I'm not quite sure why these two get confused since they were filed like 3 years apart or something. My 'guess' and 'asumption' on my part is.....
That the second patent was the application that PTP filed to cover thier Emag design that was respectfully given to AGD , in which Tom later deceided to let die. I'm not really sure though other than I belive it was filed under electronic.

Do you really believe this?? Look at the continuity data from the USPTO. Some claims(#16 through 27-- the ones talking about pneumatic triggers), from patent #6,802,305 were found to be different enough from the main subject matter at hand (magnetic triggers) that the USPTO forced it to be filed as a separate application, a Divisional. So, application # 10/912,269 was split off from patent #6,802,305. Patent # 6,802,305 was granted, covering magnetic triggers. Application #10/912,269 is not yet granted. If the USPTO felt that the pneumatic triggers was different enough from patent #6,802,305, then clearly patent #6,802,305 does NOT cover pneumatic triggers, no matter what the abstract and supporting text says.

As for DW's Patent it seems obvious that thier claims are covered in PTPs Patent and as is often the case ( Sp Anyone? ) the USPTO examiner simply dropped the ball on his part of the research. Only a court case could clear up thier standings at this point.

Are you a patent guy? Trust me when I say that the USPTO was supplied with ALL of the "research material" they needed when the hAir was filed, and it was still granted.
I am not questioning patent strategies. I am not questioning granted dates. I am questioning you.

[nicad]

ps- all of the public facts and data can be found here:

http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_CH/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.getBib/.ps/N/.c/6_0_69/.ce/7_0_3AB/.p/5_0_341/.d/9?selectedTab=fileHistorytab&isSubmitted=isSubmitted&dosnum=10912269

[RRfireblade]

I am not questioning granted dates. I am questioning you.

Fine question me , I said I'm not "The Patent guy".

I also said I'm only guessing and can only make an assumption cause I "don't really know".

Rabid 'was' PTPs patent guy , I can only go by things I've been told while under PTP/K2s employ. I'm sure he can expain any questions to the validity of PTPs patent.

All I do know is K2 purchased it's rights for the sole purpose of the pneumatic content and spent months and many thousands of dollars making sure the patent was secure.I/We were told there were no questions , loop holes or flaws in the Granted patent the purchase went thru unquestioned at that point.

With all do respect , I'll put my eggs in their basket on that one over a handfull of open ended posts on a paintball forum. I've said on a number of occasion I'm no Patent attorney or expert.

I'm not sure what difference it makes anyway?

[RRfireblade]

Jay, If you are not the patent guy, why are you stating things with such authority?

Unless I'm mistaken since I'm not "The Patent guy"

My 'guess' and 'assumption' on my part is.....

Excuse me?

You also know full well, if it is not covered in a claim, it is not covered in the patent. Yes, all the other data helps support the claims and make them stronger, but if it is not claimed, it is not covered. Are you a patent guy or not?

Unless I'm mistaken since I'm not "The Patent guy"

Not sure how much clear that can be.

[RRfireblade]

Oh , and lastly....

I've been asked about those two Patent listings in past and ask anyone who has asked me about them if I didn't say I'm not really sure what's going on there.

From now on I'll defer Patent questions to K2 if that'll make you feel better.





















Still not sure why it even really matters.

[RRfireblade]

In closing , I'll summize with this.....

.................because of that aspect, we spent a LOT of time developing all of the possible alternative methods for accomplishing those goals and putting them into the patent app.

.............Jay came into this thing at that stage.

[nicad]

...
I'm not sure what difference it makes anyway?

You are right. It would not make much difference, except you have gained a bit of respect from many thousands of users on here and elsewhere.. So what you say is held in high regard and typically not questioned. Again, that is fine, except the times in there were a few passing swipes were made at me and my company. They were assumptions on your part, but read as truth from others. Those posts, comments, and remarks have since been removed. I usually do not get involved with online confrontations. I stick to business as usual. But I feel I have to simply point out here that you do not know everything about DW, AGD, and behind the scenes involving patents and agreements regarding the hAir. I do not think PTP would like for AO to hear my side of the story. I do not know everything as well, but the point is I kept my mouth shut.

I think it is great that K2 paid a lot for PTP's IP. I too would like to eventually license out for real money.
However, a story comes to mind about a comment Dave made shortly after Dye paid out 7 digits $$$ for the Matrix spool valve IP: "So, what is this about a SP electro patent?".
Moral of the story- big $$ does not always mean smart $$.

[CaliMagFan]

To whom then d othe spoils belong?

I just spent the last 20 minutes reading over the patent paperwork from the USPTO for Colin's pneu trigger... I'm impressed, interested and now more curious. This design is BEYOND my ability to make, and I hope that the patent's presence gives someone with that ability the legal right to produce it.

So, I'm curious, who can legally build this right this very moment?

I think that we have all come to the point of "put up and/or shut up."

There are a couple of people who have the patents, papers, and laws on their sides, the rest should shut up about what they developed and allow the people with the right to go to business to do so.

If nobody builds this then I'm going to build my own copy of the patented one on Sept 7, 2019.

-kr