That could be part of it. Not sure

are the NOL's worth something to novelty capital? is that what's going on here?

Novelty Capital Partners I, LLC, http://noveltycapital.com/


Novelty Capital is a private investment firm focused on technology companies with expertise in complex areas such as intellectual property and unique tax situations.

We seek to identify both equity and credit investment opportunities where we can unlock value utilizing our expertise.

https://www.otcmarkets.com/filing/html?id=12909432&guid=Hi7EUarWJBhn13h

How does it feel to be right? :) Lol...

Yes. I'm not sure what they're up to, but I put a few dollars into the stock just in case. BMG / Amorphous Alloys have huge potential. Some how the company is trying to exploit or related to Liquidmetal. I can't put my finger on it but we shall see.

Patent trolls win.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/judge-throws-out-allergan-patent-slams-companys-native-american-deal/

$PRZM still has no cash but just gave away ~85% of the company for some amorphous metals patents--anyone know anything about the potential here? market doesn't seem to hate it as much as the prospects for the legacy patents?!
http://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/prism-technologies-group-enters-into-asset-purchase-agreement-with-amorphous-technologies-20171020-00224

Patent troll companies must fail.

Well, that is disappointing to say the least.

Given that Strom says that Sprint is off the hook makes it very disappointing.

I suspect that debtholders will take control of what is left in the company as there is no other near-term positives - that I can foresee.

In hindsight, I shouldn't have bought yesterday ....

I am just glad I took profits earlier. Sucks to lose, but that's the problem with these ones.

If the case was as good as gold, it would never have been in a public company - why else would the previous holders sell otherwise?

I would have loved to know the ruling yesterday and I would have sold off at that point.

Judgement for Sprint. Complete disaster. No revenue and a mountain of debt.

@komani: so now i'm confused--this interpretation seems to indicate that sprint is completely off the hook??
https://www.law360.com/articles/952316/sprint-relieved-of-32-2m-judgment-after-prism-ip-axed?ts_pk=a611ad83-1c97-44bd-be3c-0d7abf4016ec

thanks @Komani.
a helpful perspective.
what about the rest of the patents?
nothing there at all that's worth litigating?
(or at least firing off a few letters?)
ps: i was under the impression there's a also a few million in interest,
as sprint has dragged this on for so long!
& i assume the interest on the first $16.5 million will also go to przm?!

I don't see anything that has changed.

I picked up a few more I am now at a pretty decent amount of shares.

I doubt that once the Sprint litigation is over, that PRZM will continue.

Debts will be paid off and the balance paid to shareholders.

Remember that PRZM gets 100% of first $16.5 Million and will get 30% of the next $49.5 Million (so 30% of $13.5 Million)

That's $20 Million roughly.

I estimate that total payable debts (including CEO salary) to be about $10 Million

Given that there is only 10 Million shares outstanding, it's still about $1/share.

It seems that someone with 100,000-200,000 shares bailed today.

Again, I still don't see why the decision would be turned over.

It could happen, but it isn't likely.

@Komani--do you still expect przm to prevail against sprint despite the sell off today?
has anything really changed?

Law360, New York (July 25, 2017, 9:40 PM EDT) -- A Federal Circuit panel Monday declined Tuesday to recall a decision affirming a $30 million infringement verdict against Sprint Spectrum in a suit from Prism Technologies LLC over two network security patents, ruling that it would not impact Sprint’s motion at the district court level.

So how come przm didnt react to this?

Good to know. My thoughts were similar. Tmobile argued different points in their case and Sprint can not go back and try to argue that now. Tmobile case was titled as "non precedential" so it would be a long shot for Sprint to use it as a means to overturn their trial. Why do you only think .75? If the payout is 32 million I believe PRZM gets almost 20 million of that cash. Should put share price close to $2 and they may do a special dividend again like they did a few years back.

It is unlikely that the Supreme court will look into this and change the ruling.

In order for the ruling to be changed, you need to prove something like the judge was prejudiced against Sprint.

Once cases go to Appeal, there really needs to be an issue to reverse the lower courts ruling.

To reiterate, the Sprint case was ruled in Prism's favor already ... to change it would mean that there is something wrong with how the trial went or the judge was prejudiced.

To reiterate, the T-Mobile case was ruled against Prism's favor already ... to change it would mean that there is something wrong with how the trial went or the judge was prejudiced.

I have bought shares I sold above $0.80 at 1/3 the initial cost.

I don't see this as a $5 or $10 stock .... but I think it should go back to $0.75+ in time.

Of course, the courts could rule against PRZM in the Sprint, but as I already said, the appeal courts usually do not change rulings unless there is something unfair or prejudiced.

Conversely, I don't expect PRZM to win the Appeal against the T-Mobile case for the same reason.

Alvato, does this mean the patents are invalid in Sprint case as well? Or did Sprint waive this line already? Starting to look like Supreme court will look at this to me. I am confused how the same judge who affirmed a 32 million judgement with sprint for these patents in Sprints appeal attempt, also ruled they are invalid against Tmobile, which was Prisms appeal case. This seems convoluted.

Nope.

Retest the low at 14 cents.

Do they have an appeal vs Sprint yet or is this a final decision?

How does this effect the Sprint decision?

Shockingly, the Federal Circuit ruled on Friday in the T-Mobile case in record time holding patents invalid under Section 101. Obviously, very bad news for Prism.

caf posted the recording a week or so ago--thought the judge was a bit sceptical of t-mobile but not as conclusive ad sprint hearing

Any info on oral arguments vs T Mobile today?

Any info on oral arguments today vs T Mobile?

Cool. I like this. Obviously PRZM isnt going to go out of business, no matter how long Sprint stalls for time, because they will get the money eventually. But the finances are frail and the company has already wasted ~25cents/share on the micro-cap equivalent of payday loans in its necessary efforts to keep the lights on....

The motion Prism should file addresses an identical issue to that just raised by Bayer in its dispute with Dow.


Bayer Seeks To Collect $455M Award In Dow Patent Row
By Kevin Penton

Law360, New York (May 22, 2017, 10:41 PM EDT) -- Arguing that Dow Chemical Co. had reached the end of its legal rope in a lengthy patent licensing dispute, units of Bayer AG asked a Virginia federal judge on Friday for permission to collect on a more than $455 million arbitration award without waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on Dow's long-shot petition for review.

A stated intent by Dow to appeal the dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court should not forestall the enforcement of a $528.3 million bond taken out by Dow that...

Thanks Alvato--agree with your points.
Hope that the court reacts accordingly and Sprint is forced to pay up!
Has PRZM filed motion seeking to collect the money yet?

Yes. Sprint will use the going concern language as a basis for arguing why they should not be required to satisfy the judgment now. The idea being if Sprint is successful with its Supreme Court petition Prism might not have the resources to repay the $30M. My reading of the relevant statute though is that the district court does not have the authority to delay Sprint's payment. Of course, Sprint (and the district court) know Sprint has no chance of having cert granted in any case. Sprint merely wants to delay till the T-Mobile case is decided. That won't help either though regardless of what happens and regardless of when it happens.

Good.
So less of an advantage to going to supremes re delaying payment?!
(you saw the "going concern" statements in the przm 10k--Sprint must just be hoping they go bust).
Sprint may also have bigger issues for the supremes later and want to keep their powder dry??

Waiting for Prism to file a motion seeking to collect against the supersedes bond. Sprint will oppose arguing payment should wait till after cert petition is decided. This exact issue was addressed in the Wellogix case in SD Texas in 2014.

This is a link - http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2014/02/wellogixvaccenture-wellogixreply.pdf - to the Wellogix Reply Brief explaining why it should be paid immediately rather than having to wait for the Supreme Court.

Wellogix prevailed and Accenture was required to pay the judgment, while its cert petition was still pending.

Nice. Thanks for heads up.
Was there an additional interest finding?

Disappointing to see zero volume.
Potential will hopefully start to sink in over time.

Mandate issued about an hour ago. Expect Prism to ask the district court in the next day or so to allow it to collect the $30M+ against the pending appeal bond. Expect Sprint to oppose arguing payment should wait until after cert petition is considered later this year. Most likely the district court finds for Prism and compels Sprint to pay up in the next week or two.

Interesting.
So if they do try to escalate to the supremes does that mean they won't have to pay til there's a decision there?

They could have filed a motion before the Supreme Court and/or the Federal Circuit seeking a stay. It would almost certainly have been denied. Too late now given the mandate issues Monday. Instead they will try and convince the court to delay the payment until the cert petition is filed and considered. Unlikely that argument will be successful. I expect that fight in district court to begin and end in a week or two.

@Alvato: interesting--are there even any avenues available to them to stay that issuance.
Havent they now definitively lost in that channel--ie is a plea to the supremes the last ditch defense for them?

Sprint has not filed any motions to stay issuance of the mandate. Seems odd. After mandate issues on Monday, I expect Prism will within a day or so move to force Sprint to pay the judgment.

@eharny: both will go live later in the year after Sprint has exhausted all avenues for appeal (ie Supremes).
Timing couldn't be better.

Wow that is exciting info! What was the date of the T Mobile appeal? Is there any info on timing for a Verizon trial?

Over $0.90 today: I guess PRZM will continue to leak upwards towards (highly conservative) fair value of $2/share as the deadline continues to approach for receipt of the ~$35 million (including accrued interest pre and post judgement) from Sprint. However we still have outstanding lawsuits against Verizon (the BIG ONE), US Cellular & T-Mobile. Once the Supremes refuse Sprint's motion to appeal (well over 95% of those motions are denied & the majority of those that are heard are affirmed), the HUGE catalyst could well be a decent offer to settle from T-Mobile, granted that the Sprint judgement & judges opinion on the same patents T-Mobile is arguing as invalid has been ensconced as "precedential"....

If PRZM nails the trifecta of wireless carriers above, the stock is worth over $10/share with more patents to be monetized in inventory!

Pretty much what you said, @Alvato--with the added key date that Sprint has til August 7th to make the appeal to move the case to Supremes (though I think that the CAFC judgement was written in such a way to make that appeal d.o.a). Will the post judgement interest take us to $35 million? Guess we find out on May 15th?!

Prism Tech. reports Federal Circuit rejects Sprint's (S) request for rehearing
5:36 PM ET 5/8/17 | Briefing.com
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected a request by Sprint Spectrum LP d/b/a Sprint PCS for a rehearing of Sprint's appeal of the patent infringement verdict in favor of its subsidiary, Prism Technologies. In June 2015, a jury in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska found that the accused Sprint network systems and methods infringe multiple claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,387,155 and 8,127,345 and Prism LLC was awarded trial damages of $30 million. Prism LLC was also awarded $2 million in prejudgment interest and will be entitled to post-judgment interest in an amount to be determined. The Federal Circuit will issue its mandate on May 15, 2017, transferring jurisdiction of the case back to the District Court. Sprint, however, has until August 7, 2017 to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is not obligated to accept the appeal.

Perfect--thanks.
Love the way you're thinking @Alvato!

This is the same petition mentioned in that post. My best guess as to the timeline is as follows:

1. Sprint spends the next 7 days trying to get the Federal Circuit and Supreme Court to stay issuance of the mandate pending filing of a cert petition. I expect these motions to be denied before May 15.

2. Mandate issues May 15.

3. During week of May 15 Prism files a motion in district court seeking to execute against the supersedeas (appeal) bond posted by Sprint.

4. Sprint argues motion should be denied (in accordance with earlier stipulation) and payment only made after cert petition is considered by Supreme Court.

5. District court quickly denies motion and Sprint pays the $30M+ judgment around end of month.

6. Sprint nevertheless files its cert petition, which is denied around October 6 before the T-Mobile appeal is decided.

Great--thanks for the info. Looks like it was worth 10 cents on the stock price so far today--and a little more buying than usual!
Someone posted on stocktwits on May 3 that Sprint had filed a "confidential petition" on April 5 "for a rehearing or rehearing en banc". So i assume that this is the petition which was denied & that the screws are tightening.
Any more news about the T-Mobile appeal & whether Sprint will pay before then or not?

En banc and rehearing denied this morning (May 8). Federal circuit order indicates mandate to issue on May 15.

Upon consideration thereof, It Is Ordered That:
(1) The petition for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition for rehearing en banc is denied.
The mandate of the court will issue on May 15, 2017.

thanks--sounds good!

Assuming en banc is denied in next few days, Sprint will likely file a cert petition within the allowed 90 days. I expect the cert petition to be denied after the Supreme Court's first conference of the next term or about on October 9. Even if T-Mobile is successful in its (Alice, Section 101) invalidity argument against the Prism patents, that decision would almost certainly come after October 6 given oral argument is not until June. Of course, Sprint will move before the district court, Federal Circuit and Supreme Court to try and delay until after the T-Mobile decision, but all of those motions are very likely to be made and denied in the next 2 to 3 weeks. In my opinion, at this point Sprint is just throwing a few Hail Mary passes.