Zerify Inc (ZRFY)

[Gold49er]

absintheminded / ALL interested in FAQ and DD - It's Just some background so you know I'm not some crackpot poster speaking about things I know nothing about (Technology / viable Patents).

This Since you asked for the Judge and Trial. And if I understood what I Read. At least I assume that's what you meant by "Understand why?"

BTW: It's not an incorrect Statement. Do you really think PhoneFactor would payout $9.7M just because SOMEONE says they are infringing on their Patents?

Your Post to me absintheminded:

So this is an incorrect statement. The "Judge found in favor of most of SFOR's Claims within the Patents"

Do you understand why?

A Marksman Hearing was heard by the Court in StrikeForce vs PhoneFactor

The Judge hears all the Merits of the Patents Claims, rules on every detail of each claim within the patents, after hearing from both parties both arguments and expert Witnesses from both parties. Then Defendant is then Welcome to take it to a Jury Trial or reach some Settlement Agreement.

A Markman hearing is a pretrial hearing in a U.S. District Court during which a judge examines evidence from all parties on the appropriate meanings of relevant key words used in a patent claim, when patent infringement is alleged by a plaintiff. It is also known as a "Claim Construction Hearing".

Holding a Markman hearing in patent infringement cases has been common practice since the U.S. Supreme Court, in the 1996 case of Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., found that the language of a patent is a matter of law for a judge to decide, not a matter of fact for a jury to decide. In the United States, juries determine facts in many situations,[2] but judges determine matters of law.

Markman hearings are important, since the court determines patent infringement cases by the interpretation of claims. A Markman hearing may encourage settlement, since the judge's claim construction finding can indicate a likely outcome for the patent infringement case as a whole. Markman hearings are before a judge, and generally take place before trial. A Markman hearing may occur before the close of discovery, along with a motion for preliminary injunction, or at the end of discovery, in relation to a motion for summary judgment. A Markman hearing may also be held after the trial begins, but before jury selection.

The evidence considered in a Markman hearing falls into two categories: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic evidence consists of the patent documentation and any prosecution history of the patent. Extrinsic evidence is testimony, expert opinion, or other unwritten sources; extrinsic evidence may not contradict intrinsic evidence

It's a shame that the MSFT Court Documents were sealed, except if required. (Perhaps only to be used in Future Lawsuits until released).

But do you think SFOR would state Microsoft is licensing our technology for their cloud security" If Details of the Patent Claims were not heard upon and ruled by the court?

MSFT is not Licensing StrikeForces Technology just to be a nice guy and help some Small Sub-Penny Stock Company out. LOL.

The above is is out of my pea-brain and in IMO.

Of Course your free to ask esq10 if that is how the scenario might have proceeded. If you feel I'm incorrect.


Esq10 post # 96709

It's free where I practice here in Los Angeles Superior Court. I am also an Estate Planning Attorney wherein I don't get involved in a lot a trials but rather mediations, arbitrations, Trust administrations, probate, etc.

You might also refer to my post On Nov. 2014, the court held a very indepth Marksman hearing

49'er