Home > Boards > US OTC > Delisted >

UnifiedOnline Inc. (fka UOIP)

RSS Feed
Add Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: Goodbuddy4863, shajandr, TKane, Gmc2020, AllinFun, magnus_invest
Search This Board: 
Last Post: 4/5/2020 11:45:55 PM - Followers: 476 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 0

UnifiedOnline, Inc. (Delisted ticker: UOIP)

Active patent case v 13 high-tech companies

FINRA ticker was revoked on July 17, 2019

UOIP is no longer trading on Gray Market


ORDER Regarding consolidation (D.I. [442],[445], [447]). The parties should meet and confer about requests 4 and 5 (see Order), and submit

responses to all requests by no later than November 13, 2019 (see Order for further details). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews 11/4/2019.


On to a full trial v 13 others or a settlement


CEO Mr. Robert "Rob" Maull Howe III
(Also Company President and Secretary)

Executive Profile: The late "Rob" Howe was
the CEO, President, and the Secretary of the
UnitedOnline, Inc. until his passing in 2018.

"Rob" received a baccalaureate degree from
Birmingham Southern College and received
his master's degree from Auburn University.

(In Memoriam: 9/21/1946-5/24/2018)


A History: UnifiedOnline, Inc. (the “Company”) began trading publicly in April 2002.  During the six months ended Dec. 31, 2015 we had three wholly owned operating subsidiaries, Computers & Telecom, Inc. and KCNAP, LLC, (collectively “CTC) and IceWEB Storage Corporation (formerly known as Inline Corporation).  CTC provides wireless and fiber broadband service, co-location space and related services and operates a Network Access Point (“NAP”) where customers directly interconnect with a network ecosystem of partners and customers.  This access to Internet routes provides CTC customers improved reliability and streamlined connectivity while significantly reducing costs by reaching a critical mass of networks within a centralized physical location.  In addition, through our IceWEB Storage Corporation subsidiary we deliver on-line cloud computing application services, other managed services such as Disaster Recovery, Archive Storage, Redundant File Storage, Redundant Broadband Services and Business Continuity Services.CTC operates a wireless internet service business, providing WIMAX broadband to small and medium size businesses in the metro Kansas-City, Missouri area.  In addition, CTC offers the following solutions: (i) premium data center co-location, (ii) interconnection and (iii) exchange and outsourced IT infrastructure services. We leverage our NAP which allows our customers to increase information and application delivery performance while reducing costs.  Our platform enables scalable, reliable and cost-effective co-location, interconnection and traffic exchange thus lowering overall cost and increasing flexibility. On Oct. 27, 2015, the Company acquired 100% of the membership interest ChanBond, LLC (ChanBond), a portfolio of patents that disclose technology that allows cable companies to provide high-speed data transmission over their existing hybrid-fiber coaxial networks. The Company entered into a purchase agreement with Deirdre Leane and ChanBond, LLC, pursuant to which the Company purchased Chanbond, in exchange for $5,000,000 payable on or before Oct. 27, 2020, and a shares payment of forty-four million, seven hundred thousand (44,700,000) shares of the Company’s common stock. William R. Carter, Jr. (a related party to the Company) was appointed as sole manager who shall have sole and exclusive authority over the business of ChanBond. ChanBond consists of a portfolio of patents that disclose technology that allows cable companies to provide high-speed data transmission over their existing hybrid-fiber coaxial networks. The purchase of ChanBond included acquisition of intangibles currently valued at $5,223,500. The initial accounting for the business combination of ChanBond with the Company is not complete as the Company is working on obtaining valuation reports to support amounts. The Company may record possible contingent assets due to the lawsuits to which ChanBond is currently a plaintiff.  ChanBond contends that virtually every cable multi-system operator (MSO) in the U.S. utilizing DOCSIS 3.0+ is infringing upon its patents, and accordingly, on Sept. 21, 2015 ChanBond filed lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Delaware against the 13 largest cable MSOs in the country.


5/23/2018: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2018-00572/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._8341679/06-01-2018-Patent_Owner/Exhibit-2043-62-EX2043_DI_271_2018_05_24_Amended_Scheduling_Order/

Court Schedule effective February 2019https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Ad7f03909-6e04-4a95-b750-69af8272c2d2

Counsel for Patent Owner ChanBond, LLC

Mishcon DE Reya

Robert Whitman
Andrea Pacelli

Ascenda Law Group

333 W San Carlos Street, Suite 200

San Jose, CA 95110

2018-00575: https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2018-00575/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._8984565/05-16-2018-Patent_Owner/Exhibit-2005-24-EX2005_DI_247_2018_04_24_Stipulation__Proposed_Order_to_Amend_Scheduling_Order/

No. 17-1686: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/17-1686.html

ChanBond, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

A little more detail on Chanbond/Cisco appeal. 

- Court started Calendar Stage with date of hearing to be scheduled by Oct 2019 and requesting scheduling conflicts. 
- Both sides submitted their conflicts in March. 
- Court hears argument only in 1st week of a month (except July is 2nd week) 
- Court Calendar currently does not show Chanbond /Cisco in June or July schedule- that leaves Aug, Sept, & Oct. 

If curious, check Court Calendar out at: 
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

The life of an appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


Court Case: https://search.rpxcorp.com/ent/969818-chanbond-llc

Court Proceedings Schedule

Decision for Cisco (~1/3rd of -822 patent unpatentable) / Appeal filed by UOIP:
April 26, 2018: https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/24339392/ChanBond,_LLC_v_Cisco_Systems,_Inc
February 24, 2018: https://ptab.uspto.gov/ptabe2e/rest/petitions/1469056/documents/d29ya3NwYWNlOi8vU3BhY2VzU3RvcmUvYmM4MTRkODEtNjI0OS00YmI1LTg0NDUtNjMwNTg4MWYzMGFkOzEuMA====/anonymousDownload

Willful Infringement for treble damages (3x standard) / Deposition of Comcast SVP (Intellectual Proporty Strategy):
April 10, 2018: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=139940185
September 15, 2017: http://www.reexamlink.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ChanBond-Complaint-ded-1-15-cv-00848-1.pdf

RPX Can't appeal:
Jan 17, 2018: https://www.bna.com/patent-risk-defense-n73014474290/

PTAB Decision for UOIP:
April 3, 2017: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/chanbond-avoids-institution-six-cisco-ipr-petitions
March 30, 2017: https://www.law360.com/articles/907966/ptab-nixes-six-cisco-ipr-petitions-over-networking-patents

Markman Hearing for UOIP:
Dec 9, 2016: https://www.morrisjames.com/assets/htmldocuments/patent%20blog%20-%20Chanbond%20-%201826.pdf

Pacer Court Updates (MSO's):

-918: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7346918B2
-822: https://patents.google.com/patent/US7941822B2
-679: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8341679
-565: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8984565B2
-774: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9015774B2
Pending: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130266050A1
Pending: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140150038A1

Background on Billy Carter (Holds 900 million shares of UOIP):
July 13, 2013: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/how-a-typical-patent-battle-took-an-unexpected-turn.html

UOIP's lawyer, Robert Whitman:



PTAB Nixes Six Cisco IPR Petitions Over Networking Patents
By Kelcee Griffis

Law360, New York (March 30, 2017, 5:59 PM EDT) -- The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied six petitions for inter partes review launched by Cisco Systems Inc., shooting down the company’s bid to invalidate two high-speed networking patents held by ChanBond LLC. In declining to review the two relevant patents, the PTAB said Wednesday that Cisco failed to show that the patents are likely invalid after ChanBond asserted the patents against a group of telecom companies. ChanBond has been active in asserting the patents against major cable companies including Charter Communications Inc., Time Warner Cable Inc., Comcast Corp. and others, court records show. In response, Cisco filed six separate IPR challenges with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in September 2016. Now, the PTAB says Cisco has not proved that it can be successful in invalidating the challenged claims. Both of the challenged patents cover a “system and method for distribution of digital signals onto, and off of, a wideband signal distribution system,” according to case documents. Andrea Pacelli, an attorney with Mishcon de Reya New York LLP who represented ChanBond, told Law360 on Thursday that the board’s decision focused on two elements: claims construction regarding the term “RF channel” and analysis of potential prior art references that Cisco had put forth. The board found that the term “RF channel” should be given the "broadest reasonable interpretation." As such, it does not include “code channels” such as data streams and only applies to frequency bands. The PTAB also said that asserted prior art references can’t be combined to reach the patents at issue. “We agree with patent owner that petitioner does not show adequately that any of the cited portions of the prior art references teach modulating digital information into at least two separate RF channels as required by each of the challenged claims,” the board said. Robert Whitman, ChanBond lead attorney, said in a Thursday statement that the company was pleased that the PTAB agreed with ChanBond "on virtually all issues." “The board’s decision confirms the strength of ChanBond’s patents,” he said. Counsel for Cisco declined to comment Thursday. The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,341,679 and 8,894,565. ChanBond is represented by Robert Whitman, Timothy Rousseau, Andrea Pacelli and John Petrsoric of Mishcon de Reya New York LLP. Cisco is represented by Wayne Stacy and Kathryn Juffa of Baker Botts LLPThe cases are Cisco Systems Inc. v. ChanBond LLC, case nos. IPR2016-01889/IPR2016-01890/IPR2016-01898/IPR2016-0189/IPR2016-01899/IPR2016-01900, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. --Editing by Sara Ziegler

Case #:
  Nature of Suit
830 Property Rights - Patent
35:271 Patent Infringement
                           Case Filed:
      Sep 21, 2015

The number of shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $.001 par value:

Outstanding at February 15, 2016 was: 1,011,928,504

Insider ownership per filing: 903,325,954

Some Possible Settlement Amounts / Outstanding Shares:

  $10 million settlement: $0.01 PPS
  $50 million settlement: $0.05 PPS
$100 million settlement: $0.10 PPS
$250 million settlement: $0.25 PPS
$500 million settlement: $0.50 PPS

A $1 billion settlement: $1.00 PPS




10/9/2018 Certificate of Interest (Form 9) with share relationship between Chanbond and UOIP


#78634  Sticky Note "PROUD OWNER OF A SUB PENNY TURD!!" that magnus_invest 03/30/20 10:10:42 AM
#78507  Sticky Note UPDATED PACER REPORTS: Goodbuddy4863 03/24/20 05:35:06 PM
#78466  Sticky Note Again, Billy has told me every stockholder will jbbb 03/23/20 12:25:43 PM
#78364  Sticky Note "I have full faith in Billy Carter, full long uoip 03/22/20 01:07:16 AM
#59560  Sticky Note Subpenny turd shajandr 12/13/18 02:51:17 PM
#78721   Yes..After COX...then another one bites the dust! Goodbuddy4863 04/05/20 11:45:55 PM
#78720   5-We Knowingly Tried Expense. money2013 04/05/20 11:03:12 PM
#78719   I think there has to be a possibility MjMilo 04/05/20 10:22:20 PM
#78718   history repeats itself re: extenuating circumstances, long uoip 04/05/20 08:59:57 PM
#78717   Oh, yeah. TonyJoe1957 04/05/20 08:21:31 PM
#78716   It will be funny to see the jury zombywolf 04/05/20 08:18:53 PM
#78715   Scruff did a great job with the WAG Long term 04/05/20 07:33:53 PM
#78714   re: "forever go down in legal case-study, embarrassment long uoip 04/05/20 06:03:32 PM
#78713   Another great one. Scruffer 04/05/20 03:35:14 PM
#78712   Provide counsel. Get your $1M fee. Scruffer 04/05/20 03:32:41 PM
#78711   re: "any other recommendations?" long uoip 04/05/20 02:06:57 PM
#78710   So, if judgments against the 13 are significant TonyJoe1957 04/05/20 01:31:56 PM
#78709   Will Cox go to trial? Scruffer 04/05/20 01:19:02 PM
#78708   I'd be good with that! LOL Frankp 04/05/20 10:28:09 AM
#78707   too late, the 13 will be exposed for long uoip 04/05/20 10:26:30 AM
#78706   Oh, I think I understand. TonyJoe1957 04/05/20 05:57:39 AM
#78705   Social Distance. ;-/ Determine settlement. Scruffer 04/05/20 05:19:40 AM
#78704   Me do what? TonyJoe1957 04/05/20 04:44:27 AM
#78703   COVID-19 Update: Goodbuddy4863 04/05/20 12:47:34 AM
#78702   The Pre-Trial is also about discussing Damages and Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 11:29:23 PM
#78701   Not until I have a bit of fun Specialneeds 04/04/20 10:06:26 PM
#78700   Will you tell your wife after you cash zombywolf 04/04/20 08:53:59 PM
#78699   Sure, why lose in court and get the zombywolf 04/04/20 08:50:03 PM
#78698   That would be great..... VC3 04/04/20 08:46:21 PM
#78697   Maybe they decide not to get exposed to zombywolf 04/04/20 08:39:17 PM
#78696   I hear they're predicting a baby boom for long uoip 04/04/20 07:33:47 PM
#78695   Cool Pics - but I predict an epidemic Toanoman 04/04/20 06:53:19 PM
#78694   https://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2020/4/4/TPQGGVAUVTAMWVKZXBYK justus1 04/04/20 06:27:05 PM
#78693   Of course. Can update WAG until resulted. Scruffer 04/04/20 05:31:19 PM
#78692   Hopefully, they will - and strictly enforce social VC3 04/04/20 05:19:05 PM
#78691   The insurance companies for Google and Amazon don't I-Glow 04/04/20 04:54:15 PM
#78690   This is standard - certainly not good news I-Glow 04/04/20 04:40:45 PM
#78689   I am thankful for a morsel of good NewbieDoobyDoo 04/04/20 03:53:53 PM
#78688   Looks like this is referring to COX Communications.....Right? Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 03:35:50 PM
#78687   The wheels are getting really wobbly. BrokeAgent 04/04/20 03:23:46 PM
#78686   next 3 months will be a rollercoaster ride long uoip 04/04/20 02:25:42 PM
#78685   Let's hope they let the Motley Crew in zombywolf 04/04/20 02:15:03 PM
#78684   YEP....that is a great thought....ChanBond's Case is looking good. Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 01:33:20 PM
#78683   Love that Post L/UOIP!! Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 01:31:19 PM
#78682   Informational Purposes Only: Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 01:30:06 PM
#78681   Great one. Made me laugh aloud. Scruffer 04/04/20 01:19:24 PM
#78679   Great news, long uoip. Thanks for sharing. stockfan100 04/04/20 11:48:28 AM
#78678   Just stay well. TonyJoe1957 04/04/20 10:28:40 AM
#78677   "the insurance companies have the ultimate right to long uoip 04/04/20 09:53:15 AM
#78676   Thank you for reminding us. TonyJoe1957 04/04/20 09:47:48 AM
#78675   The insurance companies for the manufacturers will force Specialneeds 04/04/20 09:28:33 AM
#78674   not even a global pandemic will thwart the long uoip 04/04/20 09:04:32 AM
#78673   Excellent news! TonyJoe1957 04/04/20 06:56:33 AM
#78672   Moving forward in our battle for justice. flyingboozeman 04/04/20 03:23:06 AM
#78671   Same thing was in that Pacer report....pre-Trial Conference only! Goodbuddy4863 04/04/20 01:52:49 AM