here is a reply on the facebook page from a Gun Patent Attorney
Ben Langlotz I have analyzed your patent and it is VERY narrow and certainly does not cover EVERY embedded level. There are embedded indicators years before you filed your patent application which makes some claims of your patent invalid, and your threats to the customers of your competitors both empty and probably legally actionable. --
Gun Patent Attorney Ben Langlotz
Ben Langlotz Here's one example of how narrow the patents are, and how most bubble stocks would not infringe:
1. A rifle used by a shooter having stock section housing a firing pin assembly, a grip section, an action receiver, a barrel with a centerline axis and a cant measuring device comprising:
a) a solid block having a front side facing toward the rear of the action receiver, a back side contacting the rifle's stock section, a bottom side contacting the rifle's grip section and left and right sides parallel to the centerline axis of the barrel;
b) a tubular cavity bored within the solid block having a center that intersects the vertical plane of and is perpendicular to the centerline axis of the barrel having a first end open on one side and a second end closed on the other side of the solid block;
c) a top side having a view port created by removing material from the solid block such that the cavity can be viewed by the rifle's shooter;
d) a bubble level inserted into said cavity such that when the rifle's grip section is perpendicular to the centerline axis of the barrel, the center of the bubble is aligned with the centerline axis of the rifle's barrel such that the bubble moves perpendicular to the centerline axis of the barrel as the rifle is rotated about the centerline axis of the barrel.
Like
·
Reply ·
1212
· August 23 at 5:08pm
Manage
[IMG2=JSON]{"alt":"Matt Utroska","data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net\/v\/t1.0-1\/p48x48\/20294322_1440743642678373_8695044729141659967_n.jpg?oh=3f75d029f152c313610f4590c3ef6cc7&oe=5A1FCE8F"}[/IMG2]
Matt Utroska That doesn't seem very narrow to me. Looks like it covers a broad spectrum of imbedded levels in stocks.
Like
·
Reply · August 23 at 5:59pm ·
Edited
Manage
[IMG2=JSON]{"alt":"Ben Langlotz","data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net\/v\/t1.0-1\/p48x48\/21032696_10210058916210450_4074286278815592851_n.jpg?oh=9169f7d20c3986667dfd1806a46d5f68&oe=5A1F175D"}[/IMG2]
Ben Langlotz To infringe, every element of the claim must be present. An almost identical competitor that differs only in having tapered sides instead of parallel avoids the patent. Or if there is a small hole on the right side instead of being closed. Of if the stock is formed with the hole instead of material being removed. Or if the level is shifted to one side. Of if the block that contains the level's below the action instead of behind it. Or...
Yet the threat to their own potential customers falsely suggests that any bubble level in a stock will get the customer sued. I'm not sure that unjustified legal threats are the best way to win customers.
