Sometimes, ya all know, a patent owner can get an extreme case of the mendacities.
Thinkin' somehow that fancy in-puttin' of info-mation to the tune of a ("while") clock might be a real deal when in fact any reasonable country boy can tell ya all it's objectively unreasonable.
"Claim 1 essentially describes the common process of receiving, labeling, and storing information, ... [thus] not prevent[ing] eDekka from obtaining a monopoly over the abstract idea of storing and labeling information. ... Th[is] Court did not need the benefit of claim construction to find that the claims were directed to an abstract idea."
Independent claim 1 of the '674 Patent provides as follows:
1. Method for storing information provided by a user which comprises:
in response to user input, receiving and storing information;
in response to user input, designating the information as data while the information is being received;
in response to user input, designating at least a portion of the information as a label while the information is being received;
in response to user input, traversing a data structure and providing an indication of a location in the data structure;
in response to user input, storing the label at the location in the data structure; and
associating the label with the data.
('674 Patent at col. 18, 11. 3-19.)
On account of said smell of mendacity, Plaintiff will be made to pay so as to stifle this nonsense of inventors assertin' rights they ain't got no business assertin' in the first place.
YA YANKEE INGENUITY FOLK DON'T ALL MESS AROUND WITH TEXAS SLIM, HEAR NOW?