Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Short Term Bullish.
I can confirm that there is nothing wrong with your eyesight.
If concerns about your vision persist , please consult your GP.
R.
BEARISH-BEARISH-BEARISH-VERY BEARISH
StockTA.com
Stock Technical Analysis
Log in
Home Stock Analysis Stock Charts Stock Screen Watch List Markets FOREX School Intraday
EMA Analysis MACD Analysis RSI Analysis TDD Analysis Fibonacci Analysis High Analysis Low Analysis Trend Analysis Stochastic Analysis
Symbol search
RXSF Analysis
previous 10 BLHK CYAN.LO JFIL WHCA MJDS ETFM VIS.C GSAT DVS.IN CGMLF next 10 Refine Search
RXSF Rx Safes Inc Intraday Analysis Add to Watch List FAQ
Symbol Last Trade Date Change Open High Low Volume
RXSF 0.25 Jun-28-2016 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.25 5,000
Note: Canadian symbols now end in .c i.e SYMB.C
Analysis Overall Short Intermediate Long
Bearish (-0.49) Bearish (-0.44) Bearish (-0.36) Very Bearish (-0.65)
Support/Resistance
Type Value Conf.
resist. 3.75 4
resist. 3.60 2
resist. 2.49 9
resist. 2.25 2
resist. 2.03 3
resist. 1.69 5
resist. 1.04 8
resist. 0.47 22
Chart Indicators
Ind. short Inter Long
EMA VBe VBe VBe
MACD N Be N
RSI Be
TDD Bu
Fibs VBe VBe VBe
Highs VBe Be Be
Lows N N VBe
Trends Bu Be VBe
Stoch. VBe
VBu=Very Bullish, Bu=Bullish
N=Neutral
Be=Bearish, VBe=Very Bearish
Printer friendly charts
BULLISH-BULLISH-BULLISH-BULLISH
StockTA.com
Stock Technical Analysis
Log in
Home Stock Analysis Stock Charts Stock Screen Watch List Markets FOREX School Intraday
EMA Analysis MACD Analysis RSI Analysis TDD Analysis Fibonacci Analysis High Analysis Low Analysis Trend Analysis Stochastic Analysis
Symbol search
SMME Analysis
SMME Smartmetric Inc Intraday Analysis Add to Watch List FAQ
Symbol Last Trade Date Change Open High Low Volume
SMME 0.085 Jun-28-2016 0.01 0.07 0.085 0.07 69,500
Note: Canadian symbols now end in .c i.e SYMB.C
Analysis Overall Short Intermediate Long
Bullish (0.43) Bullish (0.48) Bullish (0.44) Bullish (0.36)
Support/Resistance
Type Value Conf.
resist. 0.12 2
resist. 0.12 2
resist. 0.11 8
resist. 0.10 12
resist. 0.09 13
supp 0.08 9
supp 0.07 21
supp 0.06 5
supp 0.05 4
supp 0.05 2
supp 0.03 2
supp 0.03 2
Chart Indicators
Ind. short Inter Long
EMA VBu VBu VBu
MACD VBu VBu VBu
RSI VBu
TDD Bu
Fibs Be Be Bu
Highs VBu VBe N
Lows VBu VBu N
Trends N N N
Stoch. VBu
VBu=Very Bullish, Bu=Bullish
N=Neutral
Be=Bearish, VBe=Very Bearish
Printer friendly charts
Recent CandleStick Analysis
Very Bullish
Date Candle
Jun-28-2016 Bullish Kicking
Jun-27-2016 Inverted Hammer
Jun-24-2016 Inverted Hammer
Jun-22-2016 Bearish Kicking
Open Gaps
Direction Date range
up Jun-27-2016 0.0666 to 0.0702
down Jun-24-2016 0.089 to 0.0666
down Jun-17-2016 0.095 to 0.0949
down Jun-03-2016 0.0952 to 0.0899
down Jun-01-2016 0.0976 to 0.0965
Very Bearish
StockTA.com
Stock Technical Analysis
Log in
Home Stock Analysis Stock Charts Stock Screen Watch List Markets FOREX School Intraday
EMA Analysis MACD Analysis RSI Analysis TDD Analysis Fibonacci Analysis High Analysis Low Analysis Trend Analysis Stochastic Analysis
Symbol search
RXSF Analysis
previous 10 DL CKMY ETL.EN OCTX NWY 1459.HK GLMFF EPCUF PRSEF FPVD next 10 Refine Search
RXSF Rx Safes Inc Intraday Analysis Add to Watch List FAQ
Symbol Last Trade Date Change Open High Low Volume
RXSF 0.25 Jun-23-2016 0.05 0.3 0.3 0.25 7,900
Note: Canadian symbols now end in .c i.e SYMB.C
Analysis Overall Short Intermediate Long
Bearish (-0.41) Neutral (-0.08) Very Bearish (-0.55) Very Bearish (-0.60)
Support/Resistance
Type Value Conf.
resist. 6.49 2
resist. 5.88 2
resist. 3.60 9
resist. 2.50 11
resist. 2.06 10
resist. 1.68 5
resist. 0.70 42
Chart Indicators
Ind. short Inter Long
EMA VBe VBe VBe
MACD N Be N
RSI Be
TDD Be
Fibs Bu VBe VBe
Highs VBe Be VBe
Lows N N VBe
Trends N VBe Be
Stoch. VBe
VBu=Very Bullish, Bu=Bullish
N=Neutral
Be=Bearish, VBe=Very Bearish
Printer friendly charts
Recent CandleStick Analysis
Very Bullish
Date Candle
Jun-23-2016 Homing Pigeon
Jun-17-2016 Hammer
Jun-16-2016 Inverted Hammer
Jun-14-2016 DOJI
Open Gaps
Direction Date range
down Jun-14-2016 0.5 to 0.4
down Jun-07-2016 0.515 to 0.5
down Jun-03-2016 0.5695 to 0.55
down Jun-02-2016 0.7 to 0.65
down May-19-2016 0.93 to 0.92
down May-06-2016 1 to 0.817
down Apr-06-2016 1.55 to 1.2
down Mar-18-2016 2.05 to 1.95
down Mar-17-2016 2.1 to 2.05
down Jan-25-2016 2.466 to 2.43
down Jan-15-2016 3.44 to 3.4
down Dec-29-2015 5.9 to 5.85
DOWN-DOWN-DOWN--Strong Downtrend
Stock Trend Analysis Report
Prepared for you on Thursday, June 23, 2016.
RX SAFES (NASDAQ:RXSF)
Smart Scan Chart Analysis confirms that a strong downtrend is in place and that the market remains negative longer term. Strong Downtrend with money management stops. A triangle indicates the presence of a very strong trend that is being driven by strong forces and insiders.
The Trade Triangles are generated using a proprietary algorithm that is comprised of weighted factors that include, but are not limited to - price change, percentage change, moving averages, and new highs/lows. The MarketClub trading strategy is based on the triangles, learn more here.
NASDAQ_RXSF
Open High Low RXSF Price Change
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 +0.1
Entry Signal
MarketClub’s Trade Triangles for RXSF
long term down The long term trend has been DOWN since May 2nd, 2016 at 0.965
intermediate term down The intermediate term trend has been DOWN since Mar 21st, 2016 at 1.750
short term down The short term trend has been DOWN since Jun 14th, 2016 at 0.400
Smart Scan Analysis for RXSF
Based on a pre-defined weighted trend formula for chart analysis, RXSF scored -100 on a scale from -100 (strong downtrend) to +100 (strong uptrend).
-100
Smart Scan Analysis for RXSF
Strong Downtrend Sideways Strong Uptrend
Open High Low Price Change
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 +0.1
Prev. Close Volume Bid Ask Time
0.2 3308 2016-06-23 10:46:28
Year High 3.8 Year High Date 2016-01-12
Year Low 0.2 Year Low Date 2016-06-14
52wk High 7.2 52wk High Date 2015-12-24
52wk Low 0.2 52wk Low Date 2016-06-14
Average Volume 6,511 Volatility 365.92
It's simple people....WE'VE BEEN HAD DAD !!
btw- been holding this turd tooooo longggg and I can now see it going all the way to the bottom
Were you ignored as a child YakeeDave - you show classic signs of someone who pathologically craves attention....
We all know you are not happy with your investment - yet you remain invested and feel the need to regularly let us all know how badly you think things are going with Smartmetric....
Seriously buddy - get out and breath in some fresh air and forget about Smartmetric - if you choose to remain invested you would do very well to forget about them for a while and come back in a year or two and look what will have materialised....
SAME STORY DIFFERENT DAY LOL
Shiner,
Great to have you back.
With some time to kill before this production takes off you might enjoy some light entertainment
Men, you Are Just Happier People than Women --
What do you expect from such simple creatures?
Your last name stays put.
The garage is all yours.
Wedding plans take care of themselves.
Chocolate is just another snack...
You can never be pregnant.
You can wear a WHITE T-shirt to a water park.
You can wear NO shirt to a water park.
Car mechanics tell you the truth.
The world is your urinal.
You never have to drive to another petrol station loo because this one is just too icky.
You don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt.
Same work, more pay.
Wrinkles add character.
Wedding dress $5,000. Top hat & tails rental-$100.
People never stare at your chest when you're talking to them.
New shoes don't cut, blister, or mangle your feet.
One mood all the time.
Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat.
You know stuff about Star Trek.
A five-day holiday requires only one small bag.
You can open all your own jars.
If someone forgets to invite you, he or she can still be your friend.
Your underwear is $4.99 for a three-pack.
Three pairs of shoes are more than enough.
Everything on your face stays its original color.
The same hairstyle lasts for years, even decades.
You only have to shave your face and neck.
You can play with toys all your life.
One wallet and one pair of shoes -- one colour for all seasons.
You can wear shorts no matter how your legs look !
You can 'do' your nails with a pocket knife..
You have freedom of choice concerning growing a moustache.
You can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives on December 24 in 25 minutes.
Men Are Just Happier People
Warning
Opening this video link changed settings on my computer ( search engine and home page)
Happy birthday to both birthday girl and birthday boy!
Came across an interesting post on another forum.
Fwiiw some of the hardest lessons that I have learned in the market are from getting too close to management , knowing absolutely everything that's going on ,or at least what you were told ,and then feeling half guilty if your inclination was to ditch.
I know in the racing game as soon as you start getting involved with trainers and jockeys is when you start to lose serious money .
Same thing with stocks . The only people I'm interested in getting to know are those who are doing the buying and selling ,those directly involved in the company make you just as biased as they are.
A lot of these guys are just salesmen . Some of the things they told the shareholders,in my experience,would make your toes turn up . But they do anything to keep the positivity going , they actually start believing it themselves.
Go back to basics buddy and do what you know you do well yourself . There aren't all that many better than you
R.
Annual report question.
I quickly ran through the report and I am a little surprized that of all cash burned in the year 2013 only aprox 25% went into R&D and in the year ending June 2014 only aprox 15% went into R&D.
Appears very little to me for an R&D company.
Below the numbers I am referring to
Results of Operations
Comparison of the years Ended June 30, 2014 and 2013
Revenue and Net Loss
For the year ended June 30, 2014, there was no revenue and a net loss of $3,349,347. For the year ended June 30, 2013, there was no revenue and a net loss of $4,688,217. This decreased loss of $1,338,870 or 28.6% resulted primarily from lower general and administrative expenses.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the year ended June 30, 2014 were $2,669,693, a decrease of $685,105 or 20.4% compared to $3,354,798 for the comparable period in 2013. This decrease was primarily attributed to lower consulting expenses.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses for the year ended June 30, 2014 were $489,654, a decrease of $646,265 or 56.9% compared to $1,135,919 for the comparable period in 2013. This decrease was primarily attributable to lower engineering expenses.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense for the year ended June 30, 2014 was $0, unchanged from the comparable period in 2013.
Another reason to get biometric fingerprint protected cards.
Money & Markets
Now There Is An Online Shopping Site For Stolen Credit Cards
Greg McKenna 2 hours ago 4
Getty/ Matt Cardy
You may not of heard of Rescator.cc, the website which is doing for the black market sale of stolen credit card files what Amazon did for books and virtually everything else that’s legally traded on the internet.
BloombergBusinessweek reports that this week the Rescator site generated so much hype, and then demand, for a new batch of stolen credit card files with close to 100% validity that it went offline for a time.
They say that “The latest batches were likely pilfered from Home Depot (HD), as reported on Sept. 2 by the security blogger Brian Krebs”.
Businessweek says that the site allows buyers to filter by postcode and, “you can also filter, if you want, by bank, by card type, by expiration date, and even by the last four digits of the card number”.
With such a high validity rate no doubt the cyber criminals will be paying a premium for such ‘qualified leads’.
Indeed Businessweek says that:
Whoever the Rescator.cc mastermind is, customers—those to be found lurking on underground bulletin boards where cyber thieves congregate—give the latest offering five stars. ”They’re praising the guy like a rock star over the quality of these numbers,” Lanterman says. “They love him. They think he’s the second coming of Elvis.”
It makes you wonder how secure any purchase you make really is.
You can read more here
Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn
What can I say?
After being married for 40 years, I took a careful look at my wife one day and said, "Forty years ago we had a cheap house, a junk car, slept on a sofa bed and watched a 10-inch black and white TV, but I got to sleep every night with a hot 23-year-old girl.
Now ... I have a $2,000,000 home, a $100,000 car, 500.000 Smartmetric shares, a king size bed and a 50” plasma TV, but I'm sleeping with a 63-year-old woman. It seems to me that you're not holding up your side of things." My wife is a very reasonable woman. She told me to go out and find a hot 23-year-old girl and she would make sure that I would once again be living in a cheap house, driving a junk car, sleeping on a sofa bed and watching a 10-inch black and white TV. Aren't older women great?
They really know how to solve an old guy's problems.
The $14.5 Billion Question:
Do Visa And MasterCard Control The U.S. Smart Card Business?
By Jeff Green @pymnts
What's Next In Payments®
7:30 AM EDT August 11th, 2014
Do Visa and MasterCard have enough control over the U.S. payment card market that they can violate a smart card patent. A federal appeals court last week began hearing arguments in a case in which card vendor SmartMetric Inc. contends they do, and have.
In December, SmartMetric filed its appeal of a U.S. District Court ruling in California three months earlier that both networks did not infringe of the so-called “464” patent, more specifically U.S. Patent 6,792,464, which was issued in 2004. The company filed its appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.
In its dispute with the card networks, SmartMetric is seeking $14.5 billion collectively in damages and paid up royalties. It contends the networks are infringing on its patent “by selling, offering to sell, and using contact and contact/contactless credit card systems that use data cards that, when inserted into a data card reader, help establish connection to a network … that infringe” on its patent, according tothe complaint.
What’s interesting about the case is that Visa and MasterCard don’t issue cards, but they do support contact and contactless card technology through their brands, including contactless smart card payments through Visa payWave and MasterPass. They do, however, process card transactions and provide other services for their card-issuing customers.
The complaint contends the networks’ systems also violate SmartMetric’s patent by providing automatic access to their networks when EMV cards are inserted into readers and relay information to and from the electronic connectors of the card and reader, and when cards are inserted into a card placed within radio frequency identification (RFID) field formed by a contactless reader.
In September last year, U.S. District Judge Michael Fitzgerald issued a ruling, saying “I don’t see anything to determine here for a jury,” according to a Bloomberg BusinesssWeekreport. In that report, Joseph Melnick, a lawyer for Visa, noted that the card networks do fundamentally different things than what SmartMetric claims in its patent dispute. A court in an earlier lawsuit SmartMetric bought against the two networks similarly ruled there was no infringement.
In announcing its notice to appeal Fitzgerald’s decision, SmartMetric noted that the judge ruled against the networks’ motion to invalidate the patent.
“What now is at contention and the heart of the appeal to the federal court, is the question of who is the infringing party in the case?” SmartMetric said in arelease announcing its plans to appeal. “The company will show evidence previously presented to the court that, in the considered legal opinion of SmartMetric’s highly experienced legal counsel, the evidence demonstrates the control of claimed infringing technology by both defendants, Visa and MasterCard. It is a matter of law that a controlling party can be held liable for acts of patent infringement.”
Both Visa and MasterCard declined to comment on the appeal. In a statement to PYMNTS.com, SmartMetric President Chaya Hendrick noted that at the heart of the dispute is whether Visa and MasterCard control the card business in the U.S.
“They are contending they do not and, therefore, are not responsible for infringement,” Hendrick said. “We have provided to the court evidence that we believe clearly shows that the payments card companies do in fact control the elements of infringement as detailed in our patent.”
Following the hearing, Hendrick expressed satisfaction with how the three-judge panel handled the dispute. “We are very pleased with the questions raised by the panel of justices,” Hendrick said in an email to PYMNTS.com. “We now await the written ruling following their deliberations.”
e $14.5 Billion Question: Do Visa And MasterCard Control The U.S. Smart Card Business?
DECK: Patents are tricky things and companies will often go to great lengths to protect them. Last week, card vendor SmartMetric began arguments in its appeal to an earlier court ruling that Visa and MasterCard did not infringe on its smart card patent, as it claimed in a dispute filed in 2011. After various unsuccessful tries to convince a court that the networks in fact do, will it succeed this time?
MasterCard Should Face $13B Patent Row, Fed. Circ. Told
Share us on: By Erica Teichert
Law360, Washington (August 08, 2014, 5:42 PM ET) -- SmartMetric Inc. urged a Federal Circuit panel on Friday to resurrect its network technology patent infringement suit against Visa Inc and MasterCard International Inc., alleging the trial court ignored evidence of the companies' infringement and let them off the hook in the $13 billion row.
According to SmartMetric's counsel Patrick F. Bright of Wagner Anderson & Bright LLP, MasterCard and Visa never provided evidence to show that their automatic-pay features on credit cards didn't infringe SmartMetric's payment processing network technology, and that should have worked in SmartMetric's favor during summary judgment proceedings.
SmartMetric alleges that the payment processing giants' systems infringed its patent by selling credit card systems that involve inserting data cards into a reader, to help establish an automatic connection to a network. Although U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald determined Visa's and MasterCard's automatic-pay systems didn't use so-called “local access numbers” to determine the location of the transaction and network service providers, SmartMetric maintains that information would be necessary to manage the massive processing systems.
“It only makes sense,” Bright said during Friday's oral arguments. “The system is presented with millions and billions of transactions.”
In addition, Bright claimed that the lower court erred by determining that MasterCard and Visa didn't control their allegedly infringing payment processing systems, noting that witnesses for MasterCard acknowledged that they controlled the system and benefited financially from it.
Although SmartMetric presented an alternative claim construction to the Federal Circuit as part of its appeal, Circuit Judge Todd M. Hughes criticized discrepancies in the proposal in the company's briefs and was unconvinced that the panel would even reach the control issue.
Similarly, Visa and MasterCard maintained that the Federal Circuit has no need to delve deeply into the merits of SmartMetric's suit, maintaining that their declarations provided enough information to warrant the summary judgment finding.
“The patent requires an application program that facilitates the connection to the network,” said of Jones Day's Joseph Melnik, counsel for Visa. “That's outside the purview of Visa and MasterCard.”
SmartMetric launched the suit-at-hand in September 2011 after losing out on claim construction decisions in a similar suit against the companies that was filed in March 2010.
In that suit, also filed in the Central District of California, SmartMetric claimed the credit card companies' contactless card systems — Visa's PayWave and MasterCard’s Pay Pass systems — infringe the patent. The current suit only deals with traditional credit cards.
Visa and MasterCard secured a favorable ruling in the contactless card suit on May 18 from U.S. District Judge Jacqueline H. Nguyen on two disputed terms, halting the older suit in its tracks. SmartMetric appealed that order to the Federal Circuit less than two months later.
SmartMetric was first assigned the patent in February 2010 and quickly began asserting it in litigation against credit card behemoths Visa and MasterCard. SmartMetric also attacked American Express Co. in December over the same patent, making similar accusations about AmEx's ExpressPay product.
But after Judge Nguyen's claim construction ruling in the Visa and MasterCard case, which the judge said would also determine the claim construction for the AmEx case, SmartMetric decided to focus its efforts on a Federal Circuit appeal in that action.
Circuit Judges Sharon Prost, Pauline Newman and Todd M. Hughes sat on the panel for the Federal Circuit.
The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent Number 6,792,464.
SmartMetric is represented by Patrick F. Bright of Wagner Anderson & Bright LLP.
MasterCard is represented by Gary A. Clark, Darren M. Franklin, Andrew T. Kim and Dennis J. Smith of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP. Visa is represented by Joseph Melnik, An Phuoc Doan and Matthew J. Silveira of Jones Day.
The case is SmartMetric Inc. v. MasterCard International Inc. et al., case number 14-1037, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
--Additional reporting by Kat Greene. Editing by Edrienne Su.
Dear shiner
Fair point
R.
Dear Shiner,
What kept you away from this forum. We have missed you.
I hope that putting in a bit more humor in the forum will get you back
Husband and wife...
BEFORE MARRIAGE:
Husband - Aaah! ...At last! I can hardly wait!
Wife - Do you want me to leave?
Husband - No! Don't even think about it.
Wife - Do you love me?
Husband - Of course! Always have and always will!
Wife - Have you ever cheated on me?
Husband - No! Why are you even asking?
Wife - Will you kiss me?
Husband - Every chance I get!
Wife - Will you hit me?
Husband - Hell no! Are you crazy?!
Wife - Can I trust you?
Husband - Yes.
Wife - Darling!
AFTER MARRIAGE: read from bottom to top.
R.
Hi Bale Out,
I don t really have an answer to your question.
Like you, I welcome the news that the card is back on the menu and it sounds promising.
I would imagine that the legal case coming to a head, sorting out funding and marketing the product, not much time was left to modify the website.
Hope someone in the company picks up on your concern.
R.
Thanks PR,
Very happy to see today news release. It appears that the focus is back on the cards and that is what SMME is in business for.
The keyrings and bitcoins were a waste of energy, money and time IMO.
Not sure about the ruling in the legal case but just happy that we can kiss goodbye to that distraction in a couple of weeks / months ( hopefully with a ruling in our favour of course)
It is now all about the cards again and I like it very much.
As far as trading is concerned, I saw some positive signs. There was some healthy buying today at lower levels, something we have not seen over the last couple of weeks when investors were selling into strength.
( all data available on iHub app)
Don t think that the ones who bought today will regret their decision.
GLTA
R.
Glenc,
I found it a cringe worthy recording , except for the last couple of minutes. Having said that, I don t have a legal bone in my body so best leave it up to the judges to decide if Smartmetric has a leg to stand on.
R.
Oral arguments recording
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oral-argument-recordings/search/audio.html
Does anyone have an opinion about the fact that V/MC did not seek a settlement 'on the steps' of the courthouse.
I interpret it as a sign that V/MC both feel very confident about the outcome.
Happy that the legal issue s coming to an end. Hope it is a good ending for us.
With a final outcome about the legal issue months away , the focus is now back on the product and the funding.
Can t wait to hear what achievements have been made
R.
PR
Thanks for that info.
Any idea if a settlement is still an option?
R
PR,
Excellent. As long as you represent Visa And Mastercard and have a cheque of 13.4 billion dollars in your wallet.
Duke,
The one big difference between last year and this year is that we have not seen a run up in the share price in the period leading up to the court case. This time, if anything, we have seen some selling over the last 4/6 weeks and a few very small punters buying up some shares .
Unlike last year, I don t see a halving in the share price on a negative ruling. Long term investors who bought in on the product will stay put, I suspect. Small punters might sell their hodins so we might see the share price around 10 cents if the judges rule in favour of Visa and Mastercard.
If it goes Smartmetric s way.......
R.
Great mind Duke,
As V+MC have not made any mention of this claim, the repercussions by investors could be massive for both in case the Appeals Court judges rule in favour of SMME.
A settlement of some sort would be the better solution.
Fingers crossed.
R.
Hi Duke,
How funny is that. Had not seen your post but noticed we had similar views.
R.
BB
Calm before the storm !
Courtroom 201 Friday 8 at 10.00am
see below
Upcoming Oral Arguments
AUGUST CALENDAR ANNOUNCEMENT
Sitting in Washington, DC
(This calendar is subject to revision.)
Rev. 8/5/2014
** Panel A: Monday, August 04, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 201
JUDGES: Prost, Newman, Taranto
14-5050 CFC SRA International, Inc. v. US [argued]
14-1161 DCT T.M. Patents v. Cisco Systems [argued]
13-3128 MSPB Guzman-Muelling v. SSA [argued]
14-1318 DCT Albecker v. Contour Products, Inc. (FL) [on the briefs]
** Panel B+: Monday, August 04, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 402
JUDGES: Lourie, O'Malley, Reyna
13-3177 MSPB Archuleta v. Hopper [argued]
** Panel B: Monday, August 04, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 402
JUDGES: Lourie, O'Malley, Hughes
13-1472 DCT Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. [argued]
14-1171 DCT Capital Machine Company v. Miller Veneers [argued]
** Panel C: Tuesday, August 05, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 201
JUDGES: Prost, O'Malley, & Hughes
14-1028 DCT Qcue, Inc. v. Digonex Technologies, Inc. [argued]
14-1140 DCT EMD Millipore Corporation v. AllPure Technologies, Inc. [argued]
14-1187 DCT KI Ventures v. Fry's Electronics [argued]
14-3014 MSPB Fowler v. USPS [argued]
14-5063 CFC G.H.G. v. HHS [on the briefs]
** Panel D: Tuesday, August 05, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 402
JUDGES: Moore, Reyna, & Taranto
13-1516 DCT Internet Machines LLC v. Cyclone Microsystems, Inc. [argued]
13-1468 CIT Victoria's Secret Direct, LLC v. US [argued]
13-1469 CIT Lerner New York, Inc. v. US [argued]
13-3159 MSPB Wrocklage v. DHS [argued]
13-1541 PATO Cutino v. Nightlife Media, Inc. [on the briefs]
14-1256 DCT Yufa v. Lockheed Martin Corporation [on the briefs]
** Panel E: Wednesday, August 06, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 201
13-1635 DCT Aviva Sports, Inc. v. Fingerhut Direct Marketing [argued]
14-1048 DCT Internet Patents Corporation v. Active Network, Inc. [argued]
14-3018 MSPB Devlin v. OPM [argued]
14-7018 CAVC Washington v. McDonald [on the briefs]
14-3050 MSPB Jones v. MSPB [on the briefs]
** Panel F: Thursday, August 07, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 201
14-1143 DCT Z Produx, Inc. v. Make-Up Art Cosmetics, Inc. [argued]
14-1122 DCT Benefit Funding Systems v. Advance America Cash [argued]
14-7069 CAVC Randolph v. McDonald [on the briefs]
14-1084 PATO In Re Index Systems, Inc. [on the briefs]
** Panel G: Friday, August 08, 2014, 10:00 A.M., Courtroom 201
14-1037 DCT SmartMetric Inc. v. Mastercard International [argued]
14-1114 DCT Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore & Associates [argued]
14-1432 DCT Invista North America v. M&G Polymers USA [argued]
13-1639 PATO In Re Lang [argued]
14-3084 MSPB Smith v. OPM [argued]
14-7063 CAVC Washington v. McDonald [on the briefs]
**Monday, August 04, 2014
14-5023 CFC Freeman v. US [on the brie
Volumes are picking up but the bulk of the trades is still done by investors selling the stock.
Have seen similar patern in the last couple of weeks.More investors selling than buying the stock.
I noticed that the closing price over many sessions in the last couple of weeks painted a fairly colored picture of the trading session. Often a small parcel of 100 shares was bought at the offer price just before the final closing bell ( today 100 shares@0.1494)
Yesterday as well as today reasonable parcels were sold after market ( 50.000 @ .139 today).
Despite all the selling/liquidation there seems to be good support between 13 and 14 cents and my hope is that once the seller(s) are done, we will see a move into the mid 20 s
All information about trading can be accessed by anyone just by downloading the iHub app.
R.
Court case this Friday or next Friday?
News release by the company just out
VISA Inc and MasterCard International for Patent Infringement Based on the Use by Both Payments Card Companies of EMV Chip Card Technology -- Case to Be Heard in the Federal Circuit Court This Friday
Marketwired
SmartMetric, Inc. 18 minutes ago
NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwired - Jul 28, 2014) - SmartMetric, Inc. (OTCQB: SMME) is suing both giant payment card companies, Visa Inc. and MasterCard International for Patent infringement involving the use of EMV cards in the United States.
The SmartMetric patent infringement law suit against the payment cards companies was filed over 3 years ago with a hearing now scheduled in the Federal Circuit Court for August 8th, 2014.
In its motions before the court SmartMetric is asking the court to find that Visa Inc. and MasterCard International are infringing the SmartMetric patent and that SmartMetric should be awarded a percentage of the economic benefit and value that flows from using the SmartMetric claimed and patented technology. The amount calculated by SmartMetric in earlier court filings is $13.4 Billion.
The SmartMetric makes fingerprint activated credit and debit cards that use biometrics to defend consumers and bank's alike from fraud. The company has added a fingerprint scanner built inside EMV payment credit and debit chip cards and uses a person's fingerprint stored inside the card to activate the cards chip following a scan and match on the card. Thereby creating a second secure layer biometric authentication protection in defending against card fraud. The co
Bale Out,
I don t know what goes on in the CEO s head. I can only guess.
As for the long term loyal share holders, I hope for you guys that this court case gets you out of the hole you are finding yourself in.
OBP, appreciate your post.It is a much more optimistic picture than I see atm. Thanks.
N&B. I don t know if we should worry about Chaya being insulted. Investors are paying for her salary and all her expenses ( I asume).
Investors are only asking for answers and asked to be heard. If I place myself in the shoes of long term investors the likes of Bale Out, Shiner LMU and many more, I would feel pretty insulted by the way I was being ignored.
As for the Credit Card shown at the conference, no proof for me that it is a fully operational fingerprint activated card.
A movie clip on the web site of a working smartmetric card would actually be proof that they have a card that can do the job and take investor frustration away.
Again, I appreciate everyone's input.
R.
Retirement,
Sorry to hear you are out. Would have kept an iron in the fire just in case...
The one thing that I hang on to it he fact that Patrick Bright is running the show for smartmetric. He has put a lot of his own hard earned money towards this case. He is seeing this case out till the end, something I like.
He will get his fair share if he wins this suit for smme.
Let s hope he does .
R.
Bale Out,
This wonderfull iHub app notified me when you replied to my message.Worth getting it on your phone/tablet.
Time is running out for the company to prove to the market that they have a product ready to go to market.
If they can, investors will line up to invest in this company.
If they can't, we will have to rely on PB.
I am fortunate that I don t have too much invested in this company so I'm willing to hang in there.
Not sure how I would feel if I had alot of money tied up in this company.
Good luck to all.
R.
Thanks Matt.
I guess the future of this company is now in the hands of Patrick Bright.
No further news on products or funding. Leaves the company very vulnerable in case PB fails.
R.
Appeals court process
Following was posted on Yahoo Finance message Board by a valuable contributor
The Appeals Process
The losing party in a decision by a trial court in the federal system normally is entitled to appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals. Similarly, a litigant who is not satisfied with a decision made by a federal administrative agency usually may file a petition for review of the agency decision by a court of appeals. Judicial review in cases involving certain federal agencies or programs — for example, disputes over Social Security benefits — may be obtained first in a district court rather than a court of appeals.
In a civil case either side may appeal the verdict. In a criminal case, the defendant may appeal a guilty verdict, but the government may not appeal if a defendant is found not guilty. Either side in a criminal case may appeal with respect to the sentence that is imposed after a guilty verdict.
In a criminal case, the defendant may appeal a guilty verdict, but the government may not appeal if a defendant is found not guilty.
In most bankruptcy courts, an appeal of a ruling by a bankruptcy judge may be taken to the district court. Several courts of appeals, however, have established a bankruptcy appellate panel consisting of three bankruptcy judges to hear appeals directly from the bankruptcy courts. In either situation, the party that loses in the initial bankruptcy appeal may then appeal to the court of appeals.
A litigant who files an appeal, known as an "appellant," must show that the trial court or administrative agency made a legal error that affected the decision in the case. The court of appeals makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or agency. It does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses. The court of appeals also may review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn a decision on factual grounds if the findings were "clearly erroneous."
The court of appeals decision usually will be the last word in a case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
Appeals are decided by panels of three judges working together. The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a "brief." In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the "appellee," tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any error made by the trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.
Although some cases are decided on the basis of written briefs alone, many cases are selected for an "oral argument" before the court. Oral argument in the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute. Each side is given a short time — usually about 15 minutes — to present arguments to the court.
The court of appeals decision usually will be the final word in the case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc, that is, by a larger group of judges (usually all) of the court of appeals for the circuit.
A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file a petition for a "writ of certiorari," which is a document asking the Supreme Court to review the case. The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. There are also a small number of special circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal. When the Supreme Court hears a case, the parties are required to file written briefs and the Court may hear oral argument.
Common Smartmetric
What are we waiting for
Tap-and-go fraud: MasterCard downplays consumer concerns
Fraudsters can use someone else's PayPass debit card many times before being caught
MasterCard tap and go Customers want to know why they can't opt out of the MasterCard PayPass tap-and-go function. Photograph: David Crosling/AAP
MasterCard has downplayed claims that tap-and-go debit card technology is a boon for fraudsters, but concedes customers do complain about them.
During sentencing this week of a woman who had used someone else's PayPass debit card more than 30 times before being caught, the magistrate, Michael Wheeler, of the Perth Magistrates Court, said they were all too easy to use unlawfully.
Wheeler noted that fraudsters could even get away with using a card bearing the name of someone of a different gender because they were not checked.
And after West Australian police appealed to the public on social media for information about another fraudster who bought almost $1500 worth of items using a debit card stolen from a shopper's handbag, people vented their frustration with PayPass online.
The cards can only be used for transactions up to $100, but fraudsters may have used them dozens of times before an owner realises one has gone missing. Banks are liable to pay back any pilfered money.
"PayPass, what a dumb stupid pathetic scheme to save five seconds. It's my card. I don't want that option," one post read.
"Why don't we have a choice whether to have PayPass?" another read.
A MasterCard spokeswoman said consumers did have choice: they could use the tap-and-go functionality or swipe the card and enter their PIN as they had always done.
She said most consumer complaints were resolved quickly as they involved small sums of money.
But the process is said to be frustrating.
"Yes, it's true you will hopefully get your stolen money back, but it takes a minimum of eight weeks and if they [banks] decide against giving your money back, you will be charged an additional $25 for each purchase you have disputed," one of the WA Police Facebook page posts read.
"All this with your own savings, mind you, not a credit card."
The MasterCard spokeswoman said the vast majority of lost, stolen or ‘never arrived' cards used by fraudsters did not involve contactless transactions.
"Lost or stolen cards can be used online or for telephone transactions as the fraudsters have access to the CVV2 code on the back of the card," she said.
The spokeswoman said fraud using contactless means accounted for less than 2% of all total card fraud.
"This is in the context of massive growth in the contactless category," she said.
"Contactless transactions have grown by 350 per cent year-on-year from calendar 2012 to calendar 2013."
In May, however, Victoria Police chief commissioner Ken Lay said tap-and-go credit cards were one of the main factors behind a 5% surge in the state's crime rates.
A WA Police spokesman described it as a "potential issue".
"We are currently monitoring crime trends in WA to establish whether or not the same trends are being seen here," he said.
Potts,
Good to see you back. I noticed that you were not at all impressed the way the company managed it s business. Let s hope for some better days ahead.
Just to cheer you up a bit:
WHAT TOP BLOKE..
World Cup refund
After Nigeria was eliminated from the world cup the Nigerian captain personally offered
to refund all the expenses of fans that travelled to Brazil.
He said he just needs their bank details and pin numbers to complete the transaction...........
OBP thanks for posting the link. Unfortunate again that no one proof reads those news releases. There is mention of July 8 as Hearing date. Does looks amateurish.
Cheers
R.
Sir John Templeton quote:
"Time of maximum pessimism is best time to buy, and time of maximum optimism is best time to sell."
Sounds good to Ranger.
contributors old and new,
There is a very handy ihub app for tablets and smartphones. All trades are listed. Closing price on the 3rd was due to a trade of 4 shares, 50 cents!.
Don t see evidence of manipulation. Bit worried about a few parcels that went through earlier this week at 11 cents. Get the feeling that it might have been a long term holder taking a poison pill.( Hope I m wrong )
Market in SMME is illiquid and price will react strongly if larger volumes are traded, one way or the other.
Hope to hear more this month if Chaya managed to attract some new investor interest and also interested how the legal issue will unfold.
For the Chinese the number 8 holds special significance . Lets hope the 8th day of the 8th month of the year brings will bring us all good fortune.
R.
Duke,
I would have given credibility to that idea if the share price had risen once he left the board( 21.10.13 last post)
The share price has gone further down further since he left and recently hit a new multi-month low( 10 ish cents).
R.