ORIGINAL: OGW
ORIGINAL: brono
On Sept.13, 2007 the US patent Office mailed a final rejection letter to Scentlok concerning their patent. Details will be posted as available. Its about time ? In the Feb. issue of Field and Stream in 1999, a wise Dr., Una Lynch was quoeted as saying that the carbon concept can't work as claimed, its not scientifically possible. Here we are 8 years,6 months later having the US Patent office making the same determination. What affect do you feel this will have on carbon clothing ?
Instead of trying to discredit someone why don't you look up the facts your self. Like someone has control over when the patent office issues their report, One has to realize that this reexam has been going on for over 2 1/2 years. The claims have been changed 3 times and now the Uspto has finally acted on the behalf of all of us.
You can't make claims in advertising either that aren't true.
Here's how to look up the information.
Go to the uspto website.
click oon patent
click on view in pair
click on public pair
type in 90007331
click on transaction history 9/13/2007- FINAL REJECTION MAILED
To bad it wasn't ffriday the 13.
So these are so called facts. Is this accuracy OK.
Rememder Dr. Lynch called this 8 1/2 years ago in Field and Stream. Fox did an investigative report 1 year ago and showed it didn't work as claimed , no one listened ,and then we want to challenge the USPTO as if they care one way or another. Why ?
Source?
Where did you get this information?
Though I dont believe in the effectiveness of activated carbon clothing to be "Regenerated" as most companies claim I do believe accuracy in reporting so called facts.