Re: [paws] Please review IPR disclosure https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2340/

As Peter pointed out, it appears the discovery application has been
abandoned (I copied the following from the public PAIR -- Patent
Application Retrieval System online):

Application Number:13/490,187Customer Number:-Filing or 371 (c) Date:
06-06-2012Status:Abandoned -- Failure to Respond to an Office ActionApplication
Type:UtilityStatus Date:02-21-2014Examiner Name:SPIELER,
WILLIAMLocation: [image:
What is a Location?] <http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/portal/info_location.htm>
ELECTRONICGroup Art Unit:2159Location Date:-Confirmation Number:1020Earliest
Publication No:US 2013-0331117 A1Attorney Docket Number:042933/418872Earliest
Publication Date:12-12-2013Class / Subclass:707/758Patent Number:-First
Named Inventor:Michael Probasco , Bedford, TX (US) all InventorsIssue Date
of Patent:-First Named Applicant:-AIA (First Inventor to File):NoEntity
Status:Undiscounted
------------------------------
Title of Invention:METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR WHITE SPACE DATABASE DISCOVERY

And the related protocol discovery patent application is listed on PAIR as
rejected:

Application Number:13/339,036Customer Number:-Filing or 371 (c) Date:
12-28-2011Status:Final Rejection MailedApplication Type:UtilityStatus Date:
09-04-2014Examiner Name:SPIELER, WILLIAMLocation: [image: What is a
Location?] <http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/portal/info_location.htm>ELECTRONICGroup
Art Unit:2159Location Date:-Confirmation Number:7184Earliest Publication No:US
2013-0173651 A1Attorney Docket Number:042933/412230Earliest Publication
Date:07-04-2013Class / Subclass:707/769Patent Number:-First Named
Inventor:Michael
Scott Probasco , Bedford, TX (US) all InventorsIssue Date of Patent:-First
Named Applicant:-AIA (First Inventor to File):NoEntity Status:Undiscounted
------------------------------
Title of Invention:METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REGULATORY DATABASE PROTOCOL
DISCOVERY

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Anthony Mancuso <amancuso@google.com>
wrote:

> Note that the above Whitespace DB discovery  patent application includes a
> reference to a companion Whitespace *protocol* discovery application:
>
> "White space database protocol discovery is further described with
> reference to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/339,036 filed Dec. 28,
> 2011, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein."
>
> Tony
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Don Joslyn <dljoslyn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Try this link:
>>
>>
>> http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=%22White+Space+database+discovery%22&OS=%22White+Space+database+discovery%22&RS=%22White+Space+database+discovery%22
>>
>> Regards,
>> Don
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Ray Bellis <Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 21 Aug 2014, at 15:54, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > PAWS participants:
>>> >
>>> > Somehow an IPR disclosure was filed on the PAWS protocol document for
>>> which we did not see an announcement:
>>> >
>>> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2340/
>>> >
>>> > As far as I can tell from the title (given that the referenced IP is
>>> an as-yet-unpublished patent), this applies to the database discovery
>>> portion of the protocol. Since we have removed much of that discussion, we
>>> expect mostly pre-configuration, and we have yet to (and may never)
>>> complete the actual database discovery work, I think this may have no
>>> effect on folks implementing the protocol. But I do need to confirm that
>>> the WG is aware of this and still thinks it's OK to move forward with the
>>> protocol document.
>>> >
>>> > If there are any objections to moving forward, I need to hear that
>>> immediately.
>>> >
>>> > However, I would like to hear an overt, "Yes, understood, and it's
>>> fine to move forward" from some folks who might be implementing the
>>> protocol.
>>>
>>> I’m unable to find the text of the Nokia application, so it’s difficult
>>> to assess.
>>>
>>> I note that they’ve quoted an application date of 29 April 2013, I’d be
>>> amazed if there isn’t some prior work relating to database discovery (e.g.
>>> the OFCOM spec, or ETSI EN 301 598) although that does depend on exactly
>>> what mechanism it is they’re claiming.
>>>
>>> Given the WG's de-emphasis on DB discovery I see no reason to change
>>> course based on this.
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> paws mailing list
>>> paws@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> paws mailing list
>> paws@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>>
>>
>