Is the USPTO just issuing insane patents as the normal order of business?
Check this patent out
Claim #1 means the patent holder has rights to any flexible PCB with multiple LED's on it where the brightness is 2000mCD per sq-cm.
The patent was applied for in 2000 and granted in 2002.
How would that not be obvious to someone skilled in the prior art? I mean, flexible PCB substrates have been around for years. SMT LED's have been too. So the simple act of putting the two together is patent-able? What about the LED sign in times square? Surely it has
on a flexible substrate? What about LCD backlights using FPC boards with arrays of bright LED's?
I dont understand how the examiner would allow such a patent to be issued. I would think there would have been numerous devices that were being sold for plenty of years prior to the patent filing that violated the first claim. Short of paying the contention fee to get it re-examined, is there nothing that can be done? It just seems insane to grant something like SMT LED's on a flexible PCB as protected for 17 years when it's such an obvious thing.