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.
No clue…anything is possible in the lovely US court system but I would think Albright would be smart not to start the trial until all pre-trial motions & appeals have been heard and exhausted. That said, wouldn’t guarantee that’s what will happen.
I can tell you with certainty there are no PUBLICLY AVAILABLE court filings that would be driving the price up. Just a bunch of joint extensions to reply & a scheduling order for calendaring purposes have been filed in the last few day. Don’t get too excited about the scheduling order as those things change all the time!
Actually yes please do. I’m not sure I understand the message trying to be conveyed.
Yes, both of those things have been said but so has a bunch of other stuff.
Are we to imply there’s something sinister or that outstanding progress has been made due to supply chain issues & the product not being available for sale yet?
Ok, I’ll play along. Haven’t heard what?
Actually the old formula did work very well. I personally used it on a recurring MRSA infection. Cleared it right up. Can’t speak to the non-staining Ultra since it doesn’t seem to be available to the general public yet.
I’ve been trying to buy this stuff since last July but it’s allegedly not available for sale due to packaging problems but the Tweet says “a customer” with shingles sent them the picture? How did said customer get the Vitastem Ultra if it’s not officially on the market yet?
Would be nice to see the court doc on this hearing but unfortunately it’s sealed! WTF!
C’mon DB. Didn’t you know that it’s been said VPLM was nothing but a “stock laundering” scheme implying no legitimate business purpose? And Kipping was fighting to keep his suspected illegal shares because “he paid for them.” All that volume must have had to clean a few million shares for the Gods over the last few days. LMAO!
Agree…could be driving the increased volume. Hopefully we get a decision from Albright soon enough.
Right? Is that why Kipping fought so hard to keep his shares. Because he and his family was in on “stock laundering.” UFB!
Venue discovery for FB cases just ended on 2/24 so we are closer to a ruling.
Lol…to be fair, many VPLM investors are in at pretty low average cost per share. Not everyone bought at $ 0.14 per share and are under water like some.
And it’s eerily quote from some, eh? That’s what makes be wonder if this is done!
New ruling in N CA by Judge Donato relating the old and new Twitter cases. Hopefully this will allow VPLM to get the lingering new case dismissed quickly.
Lol. If it’s a train, I hope we’re all on the inside speeding towards a VDRM payday and not stuck to the front like Wiley Coyote!
Frivolous lawsuits like Lovksmith & Kipping? Ain’t that right?
Right? Starting to question the silence and lack of product on the market here. Hope I’m wrong.
LOFL. Apparently Apple, AT&T, Verizon, Google, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon, T-Mobile, Samsung, & Huawei all hire dumb people because they’re sure AF taking the VPLM lawsuits seriously otherwise half of them wouldn’t have wasted 2 years trying to kill the patents at the PTAB.
Get back to me when the lawsuits are over so I can prove the BS wrong again!
Hmmm…very interesting. Apple found to have infringed on someone’s patent again. Now how can that be when they’ve invented everything and are such an honest company?
Could the Subscriber Unit built into their phones be similar or compared to a Caller ID in the VPLM patents?????
——————————
Apple, Inc. v. Wi-LAN Inc.
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Docket: 20-2011
Opinion Date: February 4, 2022
Judge: Kimberly Ann Moore
Areas of Law: Intellectual Property, Patents
Wi-LAN’s 145 patent is directed to allocating bandwidth in a wireless communication system. The 757 patent, while unrelated to the 145 patent, is directed to a similar subject matter and purports to improve signal quality and offer greater error protection in data transmission using a modulation scheme. The district court found that Apple infringed claims in the patents and that those claims had not been proven invalid and awarded Wi-LAN $85.23 million in damages. The Federal Circuit affirmed in part, upholding the district court’s claim construction of subscriber unit as a “module that receives [uplink] bandwidth from a base station, and allocates the bandwidth across its user connections.” Substantial evidence supports the jury’s finding that the accused iPhones contain a subscriber unit as sold. Reversing in part, the court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying Apple’s motion for a new trial on damages.
Source:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/20-2011/20-2011-2022-02-04.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2022-02-11-intellectual-property-453dda987a&utm_content=text-case-title-2
Not sure in the time limit to refile. I’ve seen 6 months or 1 year but not sure which applies to VPLM cases.
Setting expectations here…The 24th is just a due date for a response regarding venue discovery. Highly doubtful any decision will happen on that date so I wouldn’t expect any significant price movements until a decision is made on whether the case stays in Waco or moved to N CA. Not sure how long it will take after venue discovery is fully briefed for Albright to rule.
Wash, rinse, repeat…same old, nonsensical rhetoric about VPLM. Response in Waco regarding venue discovery due around 2/24. We’ll see what happens after this court exercise is done and decided.
???? Shouldn’t the commoner know through first hand experience?
Right on Rapz. Dismissed but still a pending case. T Mobile case is not terminated yet like Apple & ATT are.
Explain the last docket filings below. Looks like the case is voluntarily dismissed but not terminated.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uAjhgFaxxyiMQj0lJtMrMnwtWyTEbKqU/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sSGBrEkJg03EUgaUgcahVF5A8eOWj9W7/view?usp=drivesdk
Yes, all 3 dismissals are virtually identical and state without prejudice.
Hard to say exactly what’s going on without word from the company BUT it is very peculiar that there are now a 3 mutually agreed upon dismissals without prejudice on the MG patents cases. The verbiage on the T Mobile dismissal is 99% identical to the Apple & ATT filings and is effective without the need for the court to rule on it.
Do the defendants know these cases won’t be as easy to shrug off as the RBR cases were because the judge is not the tech-friendly Koh? Who knows but my feeling is something good is happening behind closed doors as negotiating typically don’t happen in public forums or on a message board.
Time will tell how this ends…hopefully sooner rather than later.
GLTA
Sorry been very busy with work stuff. The dismissal appears to be correct however I have not a chance to look at or download the court doc yet.
By Jointly Stipulated, I mean the Plantiff & VPLM in each case agreed to dismissal. Don’t know nor do I believe Apple & ATT teamed up to share in the dismissals.
Both were jointly stipulated to dismiss.
DB…the thing people seem to miss the most about the dismissals are not the whole “without prejudice” part. That’s been stated over and over again. The big deal to me is that the dismissals were JOINTLY stipulated, meaning both side AGREED to the conditions of dismissal.
So ask yourself, if the dismissals aren’t leading to any kind is settlement talks or some other beneficial agreement for VPLM or the bigs,why wouldn’t one side have fought against either the dismal altogether or the without prejudice part? Hmmm????
What? What case was this in? Please provide details.
Absolutely correct bird. And FACTS are stubborn things that will prove people wrong in their assumptions, or maybe deliberate misinformation, all the time!
Be well and GLTA!
Let’s go Waco!
Dung…You’re absolutely correct in the flat earth analogy. Some just refuse to see where they have already been proven wrong in the past. VPLM will prove some wrong and some correct when the dust finally settles.
It is? Just checked the Clark County docket & shows trial set for 1/31 - 2/3. Did I “missy” something?
Agreed! Kipping trial set for FIRM date of 1/31 - 2/3. Hopefully this charade finally comes to an end to start February!
Lol! According to some, there is no VPLM Thunder which is comical!
Doesn’t say they’re not.
Whoa…welcome back DB!