RE: Nanoco patent strategy9 Dec 2020 20:18
I always thought that the reason patents had to be written in such a way that an expert in the field could reproduce the thing being patented was to prevent people using vague language and drawings and then sueing after the fact for things they say they "meant" by the patent. For want of better words to stop patent trolling using bulls hit bingo. Not that the whole process had to be described without any gaps.
So, as long as experts attest that the language in the patents is specific and technical enough; and describes processes that are not prior art or simple for anyone to perform then NANO should be fine. In the spirit of the law at least. Maybe Samsung have found a loophole.