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.
Yes, that is the entire transaction record for VPLM's "Legal Intercept" patent. The patent was originally denied then subsequently approved.
And just a side note, here is the transaction record for MSFT's "Legal Intercept"
09-08-2014 Email Notification
09-08-2014 Mail Abandonment for Failure to Respond to Office Action
09-03-2014 Aband. for Failure to Respond to O. A.
02-27-2014 Electronic Review
02-27-2014 Email Notification
02-27-2014 Mail Non-Final Rejection
02-21-2014 Non-Final Rejection
09-15-2011 Information Disclosure Statement considered
09-15-2011 Electronic Information Disclosure Statement
09-19-2011 Date Forwarded to Examiner
09-15-2011 Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
09-19-2011 Disposal for a RCE / CPA / R129
09-15-2011 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-15-2011 Workflow - Request for RCE - Begin
06-24-2011 Email Notification
06-22-2011 Electronic Review
06-23-2011 PG-Pub Issue Notification
06-22-2011 Email Notification
06-22-2011 Mail Final Rejection (PTOL - 326)
06-17-2011 Final Rejection
04-29-2011 Date Forwarded to Examiner
04-25-2011 Response after Non-Final Action
01-28-2011 Electronic Review
01-25-2011 Email Notification
01-25-2011 Mail Non-Final Rejection
01-17-2011 Non-Final Rejection
12-23-2009 Information Disclosure Statement considered
12-15-2010 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
09-08-2010 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
12-23-2009 Reference capture on IDS
12-23-2009 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-28-2010 Application Dispatched from OIPE
01-15-2010 Email Notification
01-13-2010 Sent to Classification Contractor
01-14-2010 Filing Receipt
12-23-2009 Applicants have given acceptable permission for participating foreign
01-02-2010 Cleared by OIPE CSR
12-23-2009 IFW Scan & PACR Auto Security Review
12-23-2009 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
12-23-2009 Initial Exam Team nn
Legal Intercept initially denied June/July 2012, straight from USPTO...
04-15-2013 Reference capture on IDS
04-15-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-16-2013 Recordation of Patent Grant Mailed
04-15-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-16-2013 Patent Issue Date Used in PTA Calculation
03-28-2013 Email Notification
03-27-2013 Issue Notification Mailed
03-18-2013 Dispatch to FDC
03-13-2013 Printer Rush- No mailing
03-12-2013 Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
03-12-2013 Printer Rush- No mailing
03-05-2013 Information Disclosure Statement considered
03-07-2013 Pubs Case Remand to TC
03-06-2013 Issue Fee Payment Verified
03-05-2013 Reference capture on IDS
03-05-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-06-2013 Issue Fee Payment Received
03-05-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-18-2013 Electronic Review
01-18-2013 Email Notification
01-18-2013 Mail Notice of Allowance
01-09-2013 Reference capture on IDS
01-09-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-14-2013 Document Verification
01-14-2013 Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
01-11-2013 Reasons for Allowance
01-11-2013 Examiner's Amendment Communication
01-09-2013 Information Disclosure Statement considered
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
01-09-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
12-04-2012 Date Forwarded to Examiner
11-30-2012 Response after Non-Final Action
11-30-2012 Request for Extension of Time - Granted
09-10-2012 Reference capture on IDS
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
09-10-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
07-03-2012 Electronic Review
07-03-2012 Email Notification
07-03-2012 Mail Non-Final Rejection
06-28-2012 Non-Final Rejection
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement considered
03-23-2010 Information Disclosure Statement considered
05-06-2011 Information Disclosure Statement considered
11-11-2009 Information Disclosure Statement considered
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
06-21-2012 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-03-2012 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
05-06-2011 Reference capture on IDS
05-06-2011 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
05-06-2011 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-29-2011 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
02-09-2011 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
09-27-2010 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
03-22-2010 Reference capture on IDS
03-22-2010 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
11-11-2009 Reference capture on IDS
11-11-2009 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
05-29-2009 Request for Foreign Priority (Priority Papers May Be Included)
05-29-2009 Preliminary Amendment
06-18-2010 Email Notification
06-17-2010 PG-Pub Issue Notification
04-01-2010 Application Dispatched from OIPE
03-23-2010 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-12-2010 Email Notification
03-12-2010 Email Notification
03-05-2010 371 Completion Date
03-11-2010 Sent to Classification Contractor
03-12-2010 Filing Receipt
03-12-2010 Notice of DO/EO Acceptance Mailed
03-05-2010 Additional Application Filing Fees
11-11-2009 Information Disclosure Statements
03-05-2010 A statement by one or more inventors satisfying the requirement under 35 USC 115, Oath of the Applic
12-11-2009 Electronic Review
12-11-2009 Email Notification
12-11-2009 Notice of DO/EO Missing Requirements Mailed
11-11-2009 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
05-30-2009 Cleared by OIPE CSR
05-30-2009 IFW Scan & PACR Auto Security Review
05-29-2009 Initial Exam Team nn
The proverbial white towel!
MSFT Application #2011-0153809 Legal Intercept
09-08-2014 Email Notification
09-08-2014 Mail Abandonment for Failure to Respond to Office Action
09-03-2014 Aband. for Failure to Respond to O. A.
02-27-2014 Electronic Review
02-27-2014 Email Notification
02-27-2014 Mail Non-Final Rejection
02-21-2014 Non-Final Rejection
Now I have to admit, this summit and topic really intrigues me,
Oct 2014.
PANEL DISCUSSION: How
Operators can Leverage VoLTE
Networks to Protect Critical
Voice Revenues from Attrition
• What are the future revenue streams
for VoLTE networks?
• Is VoLTE a revenue generator or
only deployed to eliminate the
competition created by OTT players?
• What additional services can and will
be provided over the network?
Ed Candy, Principal Strategist, Former
CTO, 3
Voice Summit 2014
Could these atrocities be avoided if LI was widely available, could conversations have been heard prior to this event that could have prevented this!
Signals intercepted
Thumbs up to JimR
Maybe Satya Nadella and MSFT are Goliath, changing the business model!!!
MSFT changing it's stripes
In Ed we trust, thanks J
Inside the 3G revolution
So I will say this once. It keeps coming up that we are trying to monetize our patent portfolio, and that at current valuations we would set world records for a patent sale if sold. I look at this entirely differently. Let me break it down like this.
VPLM does not own the patent to VoIP itself, so let’s call VoIP a car. What we do have is this (IMO)…
RBR, this is the engine, without it VoIP goes nowhere. The continuation patents are for all the variations whether it be for cylinder configuration (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16 cylinders, rotary engines (think Mazda), or electric etc. It is the heart of all things VoIP for any provider that wishes to make money in the industry. Fred Flintstone is not going to power them all and the horse and buggy is like POTS
Mobile Gateway is the drivetrain. The continuations are more in the realm of automatic or manual transmissions or 2wd, 4wd, AWD, FWD or RWD configurations. They provide you the ability to get to your destination without worrying about having to pay a tow truck to pull you through the mountains when you are not driving in your own city.
LI is the steering wheel. This is about control, control of a specific direction that a vehicle goes in, if you let go while in motion, the s*** hits the fan, look at the current state of affairs the NSA is facing. They have no control because they don’t have our steering wheel to get to a specific point.
E911 is the airbags. This is reasonably self-explanatory but I will break it down in my view. We don’t need to use 911 but it sure nice to know that when we need it, it works. Currently if you call 911 from your VoIP phone, there is a chance that your emergency responders are given incorrect directions due to a failure in the system that provides an incorrect location, E911 assists them by providing a portal to at the very least contact you back and then trace your location. Additionally, just like an airbag, you don’t want to have to use it but the government makes it mandatory just in case you have to.
UI are the tires. It goes like this, you are driving down the road on a set of good all terrain tires. All of a sudden you come to a point where the pavement ends and a real bumpy section off gravel road begins, UI makes the transition without you even feeling the difference and your journey just keeps on going
We are not trying to sell patents, we are selling a technology to which VPLM has obtained a right of protection via registered patents. Individually they are important but they don’t work without the others…
So with that said, let’s use Metcalfe's Law in a variation for a minute,
How many cars in the world today?
The answer, The Answer
How many mobile phones are in use in the world today?
The answer, The Answer
You do the math! What is this TECHNOLOGY worth?
I think this says it all.
Tech Companies Reel
U.S. technology companies are in danger of losing more business to foreign competitors if the National Security Agency’s power to spy on customers isn’t curbed, researchers with the New America Foundation said in a report today.
The report, by the foundation’s Open Technology Institute, called for prohibiting the NSA from collecting data in bulk, while letting companies report more details about what information they give the government. Senate legislation introduced today would fulfill some recommendations by the institute, a Washington-based advocacy group that has been critical of NSA programs.
Citing concerns from top executives of Microsoft Corp. (MSFT), Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) and other companies, the report made a case that NSA spying could damage the $150 billion industry for cloud computing services. Those services are expanding rapidly as businesses move software and data to remote servers.
“The immediate pain point is lost sales and business challenges,” said Chris Hopfensperger, policy director for BSA/The Software Alliance, a Washington-based trade association that represents companies including Apple Inc. and Oracle Corp.
Microsoft is hearing from customers “that they care more than ever about where their content is stored and how it is used and secured,” said John Frank, deputy general counsel for the Redmond, Washington-based software maker.
Photographer: Ezra Acayan/NurPhoto/Sipa USA
A protester wearing a Guy Fawkes mask holds up a placard during a demonstration to mark... Read More
The company hasn’t seen a significant business impact yet, Jack Evans, a Microsoft spokesman, said in an e-mail.
Thousand Cuts
Microsoft joined with Yahoo! Inc., Google Inc. and other companies in a coalition calling for broad restrictions on NSA spying.
The Senate bill “will help restore trust in the Internet by ending the government’s bulk Internet metadata collection and increasing transparency around U.S. surveillance practices,” the coalition said in a statement today.
ServInt Corp., a Reston, Virginia-based company that provides website hosting services, has seen a 30 percent decline in foreign customers since the NSA leaks began in June 2013, said Christian Dawson, its chief operating officer.
“It ends up being death by a thousand paper cuts,” Dawson said in a phone interview.
Confidence in technology companies began to be tested a year ago when former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked documents that revealed a program called Prism, under which the U.S. compels companies through court orders to turn over data about their users. The documents also uncovered NSA hacking of fiber optic cables abroad to steal data, and the physical interception of routers, servers and other network equipment to install surveillance tools before they were shipped to users.
$35 Billion
International cloud providers are using the NSA revelations as a marketing tool, said Dawson, who also serves as chairman of the Internet Infrastructure Coalition, which represents Dell Inc., Rackspace Hosting Inc. (RAX) and other companies.
ServInt clients told Dawson they no longer have the tolerance to allow their data to be hosted by a company based in the U.S.
Additional actions are needed to reduce the negative impact on American companies facing declining sales and lost business opportunities, such as legislation limiting spying on foreigners and developing policies about when it’s justified for the government to secretly install malware on computers, the Open Technology Institute said.
U.S. technology companies may lose as much as $35 billion in the next three years from foreign customers choosing not to buy their products over concern they cooperate with spy programs, according to an earlier study by the Washington-based Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.
China Sales
Cisco became one of the first companies to go public with concerns about NSA spying. The revelations affected sales in China and caused customers in other countries to hesitate when making decisions about buying products, John Chambers, chairman and chief executive officer for the San Jose, California-based company, said during an earnings conference call in November.
In a May 15 letter to President Barack Obama, Chambers said confidence in a free and open Internet “is eroded” by revelations of government surveillance and called for “a new set of rules of the road.”
A Cisco spokesman, John Earnhardt, declined to comment on whether the company has continued to see slow sales, saying its fiscal year fourth-quarter earnings will be reported Aug. 13.
The government of Germany also has announced that it plans to cancel a contract with Verizon Communications Inc. in response to the spying disclosures.
It’s not possible to put an exact dollar figure on the cost of lost business for U.S. companies as a result of the NSA revelations, Dawson and Hopfensperger said.
“If a customer goes directly to a non-U.S provider for something, you never know that you didn’t get the call,” Hopfensperger said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Chris Strohm in Washington at cstrohm1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Romaine Bostick at rbostick@bloomberg.net Elizabeth Wasserman
Chugga Chugga Choo Choo, the VPLM train just keeps on going...
LI Child App #13/863,306
Date Transaction Description
07-28-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
07-28-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
01-31-2014 Oath or Declaration Filed (Including Supplemental)
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
E911 Child App #13/968,217
07-28-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
07-28-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
Here's something interesting brought to my attention, who has the patents for routing, billing and rating a VoIP call. Check the simplified bullets at the bottom.
Quick question for you—what technology do you use when you make a voice call on your shiny new 4G LTE smartphone? Answer - 3G, and in some cases even 2G!
Surprised? LTE is currently a data-only service, meaning, whenever LTE users make a voice call, the device falls back to the local 3G (or 2G) network, and places the call. And it will be so, for some time to come!
If you are wondering “why?” and “how?”—well, you have come to the right place! Read on to understand the Voice Evolution that is currently underway.
In the long-term, the industry is moving toward packet-based, rich-voice, referred to as VoIP (Voice over IP), which brings exciting voice services such as integrated-presence and multimedia sharing during voice call, video telephony and many more. VoLTE (VoIP over LTE) and VoIP over HSPA+ and EV-DO enable operators to offer these much-desired services and create new revenue opportunities.
A key point during this long transition is the extended lifespan of today’s traditional circuit-switched (CS) voice services. CS voice, characterized by its excellent-quality, reliability and ubiquitous global coverage, continues to evolve and increase its efficiency. The main benefit of this increased voice efficiency is its ability to free-up resources for rapidly growing data services.
1X Advanced, the next step for today’s CDMA2000 1X networks almost quadruples the voice capacity, freeing up almost 3/4th of the spectrum for data services. No wonder there is a lot of operator interest in 1X Advanced, including major operators such as Sprint.
Similarly, WCDMA+, which is the next step for WCDMA, triples voice efficiency, thereby freeing up resources for data (up to 2/3rd of a 5 MHz carrier). With 2 billion HSPA+ subscribers projected to be using WCDMA for voice in 2015, the decision to evolve the networks to WCDMA+ is a no-brainer for most HSPA+ operators.
Now, coming to VoLTE, as is the case when bringing any new technology to market, VoLTE will be deployed in phases, which means that when users move out of the LTE coverage area, VoLTE calls will have to be handed off to CS voice. In that scenario, a feature called SRVCC (Single Radio Voice Call Connectivity) comes to the rescue, making the handoff from VoLTE to CS voice seamless, reliable and transparent to users.
As mentioned above, the main attraction of VoLTE is its ability to offer rich-voice services, but when calls hand off to CS, only voice is moved over, not the other services. This means, operators have to evolve their networks to VoIP over HSPA+/EV-DO in parallel to VoLTE to offer rich-voice services ubiquitously across all of their coverage area.
Qualcomm (the company responsible for innovating 1X Advanced and WCDMA+) is now leading the voice evolution, spearheading the development of VoLTE and VoIP over HSPA+/EV-DO. Moreover, we demonstrated the world’s first SRVCC hand-off between VoLTE and 3G voice with Ericsson in Feb 2012.
If any of this is confusing to you, here’s the bottom line on voice evolution:
**For now: CS voice
**In the near future: VoLTE with SRVCC
**In the long-term: Full VoIP with VoLTE and VoIP over HSPA+/EV-DO
Along the way continue to evolve and increase efficiency of CS Voice with 1X Advanced and WCDMA+
If this piques your interest and you’d like to know more, please visit our webpage www.qualcomm.com/voice_evolution.
2G, 3G & 4GLTE facts
I've got a .1501 transaction as low of the day...
Maybe MSFT is the buyer, they may very well become the VoIP app of choice for mobile customers...
Skype to Amazon
I believe that score is correct. Ironically i found an article about how India was ccontemplating shutting down VoIP providers such as Google and Skype because , well simply put, they want a piece of the pie and they meant that in more than one way...
What if the offer is from MSFT for 10 billion. What if they have negotiated a JV with TATA for. 100's of millions annually, what if Carlos wrote a check for 7 billion, what if AT&T said 3 billion works for us, what if, what if, , what if. Green Flag, Green Flag and Green Flag. There's a whole lot of what if's out there.
And its only been 17 days since they announced an offer had been received. I fully believe we need to give them at the very least 30 days. I don't see an offer being made and given a two week deadline for acceptance...I am not expecting anything until the end of next week...At the earliest. If it happens before then, yeah for us.
Can you say RBR, I would wager Prof Candy didn't leave much unsaid here either.
BBTM Speakers
Can anyone say Uninterrupted Transmission of Protocol, I wonder if Prof Candy will allow anyone else to speak during his panel time.
DTG Agenda
Off the top of my head, I will say it is taking about 8 months on average to get a child through give or take a month but with only one issued, we are dealing with a small sample size. I will say that we may get some real positives regarding the other four that were recently sent to GAU. On the other hand I really don't think we will be watching for that much longer.
Thanks DB, never went to far...
I am going to respectfully disagree with the issue of the portfolio not being complete. Even with all the continuation being run through the USPTO and the recent filings, I highly doubt they would have started taking offers at this time if they were not prepared.
As for 8 weeks being the time it takes for a child to be put through, that's not even close, I will provide more specifics but the USPTO site is not responding here and has not for about an hour. I don't remember MALAK stating that but I could have missed that.
I don't see this filing being of any consequence to the deals going forward with the exception of perhaps some of the inventors/programmers being paid some big bucks to continue on till they are all finalized with the new owner.
Honestly I think it is not about what someone wanted tweaked but more about further continuation upon the recently approved RBR child. This also leads me to speculate the potential for 6 more filings considering there are 6 more children pending. If a buyer wanted to tweak any of these, I am sure they could do so once their money took the place of their mouth.
...We have the goodies...
It would appear they are not done yet...
14/325,181 filed on 07-07-2014 which is Pending claims the benefit of 12/513,147
A fourth child patent of RBR, unfortunately it is not ready for publication to provide some insight as to what it is for...
It will however take this portfolio to 13 patents, perhaps even more to come!
Actually, that was your link that i copied and renamed, you have the other 2 correct however.
No, my answer is no the portfolio is not complete. There are the 5 parents approved and 1 child approved. There are still 6 child patents still being examined although 4 of the 6 have recently been sent to GAU for consideration.
You are right, there are never amicable agreements in business, only legal fights.
I think we all know that the value of VPLM's IP is approximately zero.
I think many people would disagree with "Your Statement"...
Not necessarily AAPL but a company like MSFT who tried to get Lawful Intercept and realizes that it would be cheaper and easier to pay licensing now rather than litigate and pay later, there are many others like say Vonage perhaps that might feel the same way. Litigation isn't always the best road.
I couldn't agree more, this process would allow them really put a more accurate value on the company as a whole...
I was following along, the problem is what you posted was not all accurate...
Your post
What about this mobile gateway application?
Mobile Gateway, patented case
This is the outstanding child patent for Mobile Gateway
[url]
https://www.google.com/patents/US20140024367?dq=Digifonica+(International)&ei=fL3DU-ONJNCayATXt4GYAw&cl=en[/url][tagMobile Gateway Child pending[/tag]
07-03-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
And this routing nmessages application?
RBR, Patented Case
These are the children from RBR
RBR 1st child, pending
07-08-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-20-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-20-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
RBR 2nd child, patented case
07-08-2014 Recordation of Patent Grant Mailed
06-19-2014 Email Notification
06-18-2014 Issue Notification Mailed
07-08-2014 Patent Issue Date Used in PTA Calculation
06-02-2014 Dispatch to FDC
06-02-2014 Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
RBR 3rd child, pending
07-08-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
and this
[url]
https://www.google.com/patents/US20140010119?dq=inassignee:%22Digifonica+(International)+Limited%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qMPDU-GeOY6vyASvuIK4DA&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBTgK[/url][tag]RBR 3rd child, you got this right[/tag]
and this
[url]
https://www.google.com/patents/CA2670510A1?cl=en&dq=inassignee:%22Digifonica+(International)+Limited%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qMPDU-GeOY6vyASvuIK4DA&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBDgK[/url][tag]This is Lawful intercept, Patented Case[/tag]
This is the correct outstanding child for Lawful Intercept
Lawful Intercept, Child
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
If you followed along, I posted updates on the most recent activity for any relevant changes to child patents the other day...
Judging by the fact that they have proceeded into negotiations at this point, I would say very little.
6 more child patents.
What about them?
Full patent update. (Only if relevant changes)
RBR 1st Child 13/966,096
07-08-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-20-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-20-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
RBR 3rd Child 14/029,671
07-08-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
Mobile Gateway Child 14/035,806
07-03-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Reference capture on IDS
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
03-19-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
UI Child 14/092,831
07-02-2014 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
06-06-2014 Email Notification
06-05-2014 PG-Pub Issue Notification
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
04-30-2014 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
02-13-2014 Preliminary Amendment
And for those who will question what is "Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU", This means the application has been reviewed by the legal instruments examiner and all the papers have been entered into the Image File Wrapper for the examination by an examiner in the General Art Unit . The next thing that happens is the examination by the examiner who will issue an Office Action to either issue or deny or return the patent application for further information.
But then again this is all a scam so none of this really exists does it!
It was RBR's 2nd child. VPLM's 6th patent! They do exist.
Well considering that the basic definiton of "application" is "the act of putting to special use or purpose"
"application" defined
This would tell me that they have invented a lot of technology that to their knowledge, no one else is currently using...
Post the whole list next time please, it helps people get a complete picture.
This is the list of how the technology is applied, it is written in the same white paper.
1. Routing, Billing, and Rating (RBR) – This is the enabling technology, published in USPTO Publication #20100150328, that describes VoIP call routing, metering, and billing mechanisms for IP and mixed IP/PSTN networks.
2. Lawful Intercept (LI) – an adjunct technology, published in USPTO Publication #20100150138, elaborates methods for intercepting and recording VoIP-hosted calls as may be required, for example, to comply with surveillance orders.
3. Enhanced 911 Emergency Assistance (E911) – another adjunct technology, published in USPTO Publication #20100172345, which describes a robust emergency assistance platform for VoIP telephony implementations.
4. Mobile Gateway (MG) –published in USPTO Publication #20100172345, is an technology utilizing VoIP delivered through mobile networks to drastically reduce international roaming charges for consumers by turning all long distance and international calling charges into local calling charges.
This is a list of the known applications (uses by voip providers) at the time the white paper was written
Lawful Intercept
No currently known applications
Enhanced 911 Emergency Assistance
No currently known applications
Mobile Gateway
No currently known applications
Routing, Billing, and Rating
The applications of this patent are numerous and widespread. Its application is so far-reaching it is difficult to be sure of all the places and uses where it is being applied.
As discussed in the prior sections everywhere metered VoIP and PSTN (legacy telephony) intersect the RBR technology is being applied. In the telephony world whether over fixed lines or mobile, international or local, this technology is applied every day.
The entire White Paper
Bingo...
I won't argue with that. A small amount of cash wouldn't hurt my feelings either.
I personally would like to see a share swap as opposed to cash, this would allow individuals to spread their CG's out over time as needed especially if it was to say MSFT or another entity with great forward looking businesses...