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.
Exactly! Companies NEVER admit nor concede infringement when settling cases. I get the TVM calc for settlements. It’s similar to a TVM calc you’d need to do when deciding to accept an early pension buyout from an employer.
The question becomes how much in potential long-term gains will be given up and are acceptable by settling early?
In the case of VPLM, there are so many unknowns and variables, I don’t believe we shareholders have any way to answer that question with any degree of accuracy. There are many complex financial models that are used to do this and that work is best left to the experts.
Interesting and makes absolute sense from the financial side.
Did your company ever get an admission of infringement from the company they settled with or confirmed infringement in any other way?
“…threats of treble damages (which are almost never awarded, no matter how willful the infringement…”
Not so long ago, I was in the camp that believed enhanced/treble damages are almost impossible to get but have since switched my belief. Enhances damages for willful infringement are very possible with a strong case in the right court. Award rates vary by both venue & industry
This article is from Sept 2023 and has good info about enhanced damage award rates.
https://www.mayerbrown.com/-/media/files/perspectives-events/publications/2023/09/enhanced-patent-damages-trends-ip-attorneys-should-know.pdf%3Frev=2f164f5b37b6492db53f4ad52a755b66
Question for whom ever cares to answer…
Since there’s alot of talk/belief/optimism
that this will “be over” soon, we can only surmise “being over” means monetizing the patents in some way (ie settling, buyout, licensing, etc.) but the one thing it’s doesn’t include is a legal finding of infringement by the defendants.
Without a trial, how exactly is infringement confirmed or potential treble damages applied? Or doesn’t that matter to anyone?
Hers a few cases to watch. You can keep track of new filings when they hit the docket for free on Court Listener but if you want to get the actual document, you need to go to Pacer. There’s a direct link from Court Listener.
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. Verizon Communications, Inc., 6:21-cv-00672, (W.D. Tex.)
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. T-Mobile US, Inc., 6:21-cv-00674
(W.D. Tex.)
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. Amazon.Com, Inc., 6:20-cv-00272
(W.D. Tex.)
For starters, watching patent cases/trials progress are bit like watching grass grow or paint dry. They’re not exactly like the excitement we see in a courtroom scene in an episode of “Law & Order” and most definitely aren’t for the weak hearted. Infringement cases are typically very slow & methodical. Lots of motions, delays, & long time lines are the norm…Albright’s “Rocket Docket” court has been the exception a few years ago but even his court seems to have been slowed up in recent years. IMO, he’s still one of the most knowledgeable judges when it comes to patent cases. Patience & long timeframes are your friend with patent plays (pp’s).
Next, doing your own due diligence & having realistic expectations (entry/exit strategy, reasons for investing in VPLM, etc) are important in any investment but especially critical in pp’s. Wouldn’t invest money you can’t afford to lose as pp’s are NOT “get rich quick” type investments…hell many go bust before they ever realize monetization on their IP. The fact that VPLM is still standing & fighting like hell after a decade+ is an amazing accomplishment not to mention being undefeated at the PTAB.
Lastly, we all have our own reason to love, hate, support, & criticize what’s happening with VPLM. We can only assume you took the time to do your own research before investing and decided to invest because you thought it was a good place to put your money and get a reasonable return. If so, let the court process play out and the returns will come if VPLM wins. Of course settlements or buyouts are always on the table but those typically aren’t public until they’re done. If you didn’t put in the “work” to fill in any gaps in knowledge and thought it would be a quick hit with a big return, that’s a huge miscalculation and do better next time. I don’t know which camp you fall into however many people on here try to help where we can but we absolutely can’t help those who aren’t willing to do the work.
WBW - serious questions and mean no disrespect or ill intent. Just trying to understand the background on which some concerns are coming from.
1…How long have you been a shareholder in VPLM?
2…What is your experience/knowledge/ familiarity with the legal process for patent cases?
Read the whole thing minutes after it hit the docket. It’s kind of ironic the whole reason this motion was filed is because the defendants are challenging the original damage expert VPLM used. Hudnell made both defendants aware of the new expert they want to substitute in filings more than a year ago.
I’m no legal expert but I it seems Albright isn’t going to allow the defendants to refute bringing in another damages expert since they are the ones requesting to exclude the testimony of the original expert. The plaintiffs have a right to present an expert with relevant expertise to explain technical issues to “lay” people (ie the jury) at trial or the plaintiffs will be adversely prejudiced…which could be a strong case for appeal if VPLM were to lose at trial.
Pacer.gov has all the filings.
Except if both parties file a joint motion to continue (ie move the dates) judges will usually grant the motion. And, based on the filing, it appears any change would be a joint decision.
My guess is, and I’ll probably be wrong, that if the new damage estimates come in lower, there’s no change. If they’re higher both defendants with scream they need more time to figure out what other BS they can sling at the wall to see what sticks.
Like I said…I’m probably wrong but only time will tell.
Both Verizon & T Mobile had same issue. Thinking we’ll be ok on the dates because Hudnell is on top of his game and they are not changing the damage calculation method…only bringing in new expert and new damages model.
IMO, the defendants seem desperate and should be careful what they wish for. The new damage report just might come in higher than the original!
All good DB. I’m a little frustrated with the crap on this board lately and assumed you were taking a shot at me regarding the filings, etc. I apologize if it was an over reaction on my part.
Bottom line, we all need to appea to our higher angels and bring decorum & respect back to the board and stay on topic.
Fine, I’ll accept that. I’ve been and still am a strong supporter of VPLM…going on 12+ years to be exact.
So if anyone on here is questioning my commitment to VPLM, you really have no idea about me and if you’re being told I’m negative on the company or Emil, you’re absolutely wrong. Do I get upset about stuff that happens, absolutely! For example, the bait & switch on
the anti-dilution clause! Do we have a right to voice our opinions about our frustrations…last I checked we still have that right as well!
Go back in history and look at my past posts & the FACTUAL stuff I have contributed to the discussions…even sharing a large number of court docs AT MY OWN EXPENSE to the group to try to keep everyone informed. It’s pretty weird though, back then there was lots of interest in the court docs and was even begged to email them to people. Back then, this was a place to get mostly factual info…now it’s become a cesspool of insults & BS that never comes to fruition, which is sad.
The fact that VPLM is still going after all these years against the bigs is a testament to Emil’s tenacity & the legal strategy. Any long is looking for a reasonable return on our investment and hopefully it comes real soon.
Unfortunately, like 30% of society now, there’s no place for alternative points of view if those views/facts differ from what you believe! Critical thinking is dead! Further, social media has made people way too comfortable with disrespecting others without the fear of getting punched in the mouth!
Bird…I totally agree with your honest assessment. Stock price will vary day to day and not the issue. As I said many times, I STILL believe in the strength of the patents and feel there will be a positive end at some point.
My reasoning for asking for thoughts or opinions on stock price was to understand if anyone, specifically DB, since he talks to Rich often, had thoughts on why we can’t seem to break .02! That’s it. Was looking for an honest opinion only to read what appears to be a mocking & belittling response in “the filings” & self assessment. Feel like high school drama class. Did I miss something?
Really? Ask serious question to get that crap back? This board is a joke lately.
Just say you don’t know or provide an honest opinion rather than a rant on code.
This isn’t high school!
Da fuk? I asked about your thoughts & opinions on where we are on price since volume was moving up and this is the answer…or should so say non-answer?
Feels like a page from NYT!
UFB!
All great questions and valid concerns Butter. I still believe in the strength of the patents. Absent any public communication from the company, we can only assume we’re heading to trial in August.
I would have conservatively thought patents upheld & strengthened from past ex-parte re-exam, winning the 101 denial in ND TX, and trial dates set in WD TX would have been catalyst to get the PPS moving past .02 but what do I know, I’m just a dumb steel guy.
“Any REAL questions out there?”
Yep…any thoughts or opinions on why VPLM can’t break through the .02 PPS barrier? There’s been plenty of volume so what’s holding it down?
With 12 business days left in May, it will be very interesting to see how the month ends.
The odd thing with VPLM lately seems to be that even perceived great news doesn’t drive the PPS up like we’ve seen in the past. Is it due to ongoing dilution, perception on insider trading, lack of belief in patents, price manipulation, or something else?
To be fair, I’m just a dumb guy with almost 40 years of metallurgical/metals industry knowledge and not smart enough to venture a guess why PPS is stuck under 2 cents but it just seems odd with the recent 101 denial in ND TX & the WD TX cases coming closer to trials actually starting. We’ve heard volume precedes price and shares have definitely been moving. Let’s hope price is not too far behind the increasing volume.
Voltaire was a wise man when he said, “Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one.”
Time will tell if it’s good or bad! Without word from the company we’re all left to speculate or throw out opinions.
And we all know opinions are like a**holes…everyone has one and usually full of sh*t!
For anyone interested…
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO.
LTD, et al.,
Defendants.
§
Civil Action No. 3:23-CV-0151-X
DISMISSAL ORDER
Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to dismiss. (Doc. 122). The Court
GRANTS the motion and DISMISSES this action. Plaintiff VoIP-Pal’s infringement
claims for the Asserted Patents relating to the Huawei Cloud Meeting product and
service, Huawei Cloud Link, Google-Fi, Google Hangouts, and the Nexus 6P phone
are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. VoIP-Pal’s infringement claims for the
Asserted Patents relating to any other products or services are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED this
13th day of May, 2024.
_________________________________
BRANTLEY STARR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:23-cv-00151-X Document 123 Filed 05/13/24
Page 1 of 1 PageID 1064
Order just hit docket. Huawei in ND TX officially dismissed. Some claims with prejudice and some without!
Thanks Rapz. Long time no posts. Good to see you. Hope all is good.
Thanks Butter. The article essentially mirrors the court order except there’s no mention of the other claims towards infringement which will be dismissed “without prejudice” after 30 days. There are 2 parts to the court order…but you’re right…those aren’t important! 😂
Can you share link to article?
Thanks. Just found the 5/9 court doc. Very interesting wording on that motion.
Not dismissed yet. The order is a joint motion to stay for 30 days then if no further action will turn into a dismissal without prejudice automatically. 30 days would end on around June 3rd. That would indicate the parties have/need 30 days to work out details of potential agreement. If there’s a settlement, it sure would be nice to know the terms this time.
I don’t believe anything until I see it in writing from the courts or VPLM.
The other not so clear point in the continuing concern with Huawei is how the U.S. government would react if they were the company wanting to purchase rights to VPLM patents.
Would or could the FTC or Commerce Dept disallow? Don’t know the answer, just thinking out loud.
Interesting…would have thought with that volume it would have at least hit a full penny.
We have heard many times that volume precedes price so let’s see what next week brings.
Agree! I try to only watch the court dockets and block out all the periphery noise.
Yep…read the court filing right when it hit the docket.
To be clear…it’s a 30 day stay to allow settlement then dismissed without prejudice. So the parties have 30 days to finalize agreement.
A lot can happen in 30 days but my guess is there’s already something worked out in principle driving the stay then dismissal.
History has taught us nothing is done deal until it is!
Hauwei is the only company in ND TX. All other cases are in WD TX
Order just hit ND TX docket…Looks like another settlement. Guessing we won’t know the terms of this one either since there are still cases pending in other districts.
Who the f’k is buying this POS? SEC needs to look into the influx of foreign cash!
How many plaintiff companies in the statistical 34% that were overturned went 34-0 at the PTAB AND had their patents come out of ex-parte re-exam stronger than when the re-exam started. My guess is ZERO! While VPLM still has a patent going through re-exam process, it is very possible they will have another patent strengthened after it’s done.
Statistics are helpful for looking backwards at historical data but aren’t always as reliable when trying to forecast the future events when there are new situations present that never happened in the past cases!
Influx of Russian buyers trying to bail him out again. 😂😂
Penny land is too high for this POS!