Paul Allen has amended his complaint with more specificity…“The ’507 patent describes an invention that enables a user to efficiently review a large body of information by categorizing and correlating segments of information within the body of information and generating displays of segments that are related to the primary information being viewed by the user”… and so on.
There should be a law against trolling like this. I remember using software that does this kind of stuff in the 1970s before the web was around. Even a table of contents or an index could be said to infringe. This is so vague it should also be chucked. Perhaps they will tweak the court’s interest with a third amended complaint or add a few hundred other software patent claims.
17488
12790
206
3
2
23938 
11872 
11724 
4654 
4268 
1643 
198 
14 
2 
0 
0 
0 
Robert:
Saw a comment on Groklaw that U.S. patent examiners have a “quota” to meet. I seek clarification if that’s just examinations or approvals. But if it’s approvals, it’s obviously improper. Does any other nation on the planet require a minimum number of patent approvals every year? Or just a rogue bureaucracy trying to justify its funding every year. At least Google, like IBM and just about every other Allen defendant, can afford to fight, unlike, say, Tom Tom.