Published at LXer:

But Soverain actually had one final trick up its sleeve—a desperate attempt to pull victory from the jaws of defeat that was, in Cheng's telling, effectively based on a typographical error. The appeals court had invalidated claim 34 of the "shopping cart" patent, not claim 35. Instead of allowing what Newegg said was a mistake to be corrected, Soverain tried to literally make a federal case out of it. The patent company asked for a re-hearing from the panel, as well as from the full "en banc" court, saying that after months and months of arguing with Newegg over the value and validity of claim 34, it was actually claim 35 that should have been considered all along.

Read More...