Nick,
Thanks for the reply. Perhaps your departure from Sikorsky resulted in the legal objectives overriding your technical objectives, when the lawyer was writing the Patent Application.
Incidentally, your Patent Application includes a coaxial configuration drawing. This drawing was used six months earlier in three coaxial-ABC Patent Applications. In your Patent Application, the lawyer, perhaps in a rush to pump out coaxial-ABC patents, didn't even reference the text to this drawing correctly.
Mart,
Times have changed.
Recently, much has been written about the growing abuse of US patent system and its inability to now serve its basic objectives.
Yesterday's article in the highly respected Globe & Mail '
Tech Crusaders Are No Match For Mighty U.S. Patent Lobby' is just one more example. The year-by-year increase in number of US patents is phenomenal. Most of these patents are insignificant drivel. However, one of the things they do is allow large corporations to use their vast wealth as the hammer, and their irrelevant patent as the excuse, to 'squash' the under-funded legitimate invention.
You may find the last line in this quote from the above article of specific interest.
"The U.S. drug industry has no interest in anything remotely approaching an overhaul. It is lobbying furiously behind the scenes to make sure this legislation dies or is seriously diluted. Joining the drug companies are a broad group of blue-chip manufacturers, including United Technologies and 3M Co."
Dave