http://www.whda.com/blog/2011/08/two-updates/As Oracle’s action in the Northern District of California for infringement by Google of seven Java platform patents continues apace, the reexamination at the PTO of those patents grinds on as well. Oracle’s U.S. Patent No. 7,426,720, for instance, stands rejected as being invalid over the prior art. Oracle disputed that rejection in a paper filed in early July, and last Thursday, Google commented on Oracle’s filing.Essentially, Google asserts (1) that the ‘720 patent claims were originally allowed as a result of Oracle’s adding the limitation of copy-on-write to the claims after a final rejection, and that Oracle relied on this copy-on-write limitation to distinguish the claims from the prior art of record, (2) that the copy-on-write technology central to alleged novelty of the ‘720 patent was present in most Unix operating systems as early as 1994, and was widely-known in the art at least as early as 1988, and (3) that Oracle’s filing in July admits that the Bach reference satisfies the copy-on-write limitation.As always, it is difficult for an outsider to judge how a reexamination is proceeding. Still, Google appears to be doing well, at least with respect to the ‘720 patent.