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.
That's a great question. Mark said that the first quarter will be ok. I'll be really surprised if we don't see somewhere in the 6 digits. Of course, settlements is why us Longs are here but I hope to see 6 digits in each quarter in 2017 for SFOR, which would be their first time doing that. Then, couple that with Mark's statement of minimally begin to see 'meaningful' revenues later in the year will be fantastic for stock holders. All of this will be without settlement as well.
We already have, join the party!!!
I agree! Add to that all of the channel deals that are now in place. These are the foundation of due diligence of SFOR. This is what Peeps should be focusing instead of all of this ridiculous chatter.
B RY is on fire today!
Everyone should keep an eye on the USPTO decisions. It is amazing how many are dismissed and settled everyday. The SFOR infringers should settle now. Who knows... Maybe they are!
The amount of each of the settlements. Of course, anything can happen but they wouldn't be looking for a last resort such as this if settlement was for just 10 million. Anyone care to chime in?
If this IPR is dropped which it is looking that way with the first three...they will settle. If they settle, would the other four continue against Ropes and Gray and Blank Rome? Only if they're brainless. This is why I'm accumulating.
You're laughing... I'm NOT. I thought that the first three infringers had separated out but have come to realize that they are still together on the IPR which means that they have already all agreed that they are infringing. This is a last resort. So, you're laughing... I'm accumulating. I hope to be at 50 million shares by then if things go right.
Based on ZPaul's chart earlier today regarding settlement, I think we could be trading at .25 cents by July... Maybe higher.
Cheds, that you for the update. Knowing that we've reached bottom PPS according to the charts is very helpful. Time to buy.
Ropes and Gray 43-0! They are VERY well connected at USPTO (they must be at 43-0). If this gets thrown out, get ready for liftoff.
I know several Longs with 10's of millions of shares and nobody that I know is selling. They're talking about accumulating shares. News can come at any time.
Zat, don't worry, the Longs are working a plan just like the shorts.
I agree completely. That means the market cap would go below 20 million???? One settlement will shoot the market cap to 100 million IMO.
The market cap as of today is 29.5 million dollars!!! Is Strikeforce worth more than a market cap off 29.5 million?
Peeps don't realize what is going on here...folks, this IPR could be thrown out anytime in the next 10 days potentially from the USPTO Judge. This is different than the Court proceedings which is why DUO asked for a stay from the COURT based on the hope that the IPR would be considered by the USPTO office. The IPR isnt even challenging all of the various Patents validity, but just one small portion of one patent. They have already admitted to Infringing on the others!
I believe that is correct. The IPR is something completely different.
Remember, the USPTO Judge has a 60-day window to throw out this Intes Parte Review. THERE IS ONLY 10 business days left!!!!! If the Judge accepts it, SFOR would still more than likely still win it but it could take longer. If he throws it out this week or next....BANG! It will be the shot heard around the world of current and potential infringers!
We knew that there was no change in share structure...I want to apologize to all for those who would scare you into selling right now before many great things begin to occur.
Agreed. I posted over the weekend alot of due diligence regarding the situation. Ropes and Gray mostly sees through billion dollar glasses. Anyone who sells below 5 cents a share will look on in disbelief in the near future? Could be the immediate future.
Additionally, the USPTO knows SFOR owns these patents 100%! We could very well be on the verge of settlements be our eyes.
This is a HUGE HUGE POINT. The infringers are only contesting one item from one of the patents that they are infringing on. Their not even contesting the other patents at issue! The Judge can either this week or next throw out this IPR due to how ridiculous it is. If he does, big money will hit the fan immediately!
The below information is DIRECTLY from the USPTO website. No wonder Ropes and Gray was salivating to work with SFOR:
STRIKEFORCE TECHNOLOGIES, INC Domestic (U.S.) Inventor Shares 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
5 Patent Counts, all shares.
For example, some companies only receive a partial patent such as:
MARKOV PROCESSES INTERNATIONAL, LLC Domestic (U.S.) Inventor Share 83.3% 66.7% 83.3% 80.0%
4 Patent Counts, all shares.
I can foresee that since Ropes and Gray is a world-class acquisition and merger firm that usually only puts together BILLION dollar mergers and acquisitions, I would imagine that they probably already have SFOR investors lined up. We are small time investors and think in terms of a 1 cent per share stock...they don't. R and G announced in March that they were separating out a portion of the company for patent litigation which was within a very short time of the announcement of their 4 SFOR lawsuits. I have heard (not confirmed) that R and G anticipates an additional 20 lawsuits upcoming.
I will venture to say that it is impossible for SFOR's PPS to tank for some of the very reasons you just enumerated. Additionally, I can foresee since Ropes and Gray is a world-class acquisition and merger firm that usually only puts together BILLION dollar mergers and acquisitions, I would imagine that they probably already have SFOR investors lined up. We are small time investors and think in terms of a 1 cent per share stock...they don't. R and G announced in March that they were separating out a portion of the company for patent litigation which was within a very short time of the announcement of their 4 SFOR lawsuits. I have heard (not confirmed) that R and G anticipates an additional 30 lawsuits upcoming.
I just posted a significant amount of DD to give everyone a clue as to what is about to happen.
No wonder Mark Kay doesn't concern himself with all of this chatter.
The below information is from the USPTO website. No wonder Ropes and Gray was salivating to work with SFOR:
STRIKEFORCE TECHNOLOGIES, INC Domestic (U.S.) Inventor Shares 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
5 Patent Counts, all shares.
For example, some companies only receive a partial patent such as:
MARKOV PROCESSES INTERNATIONAL, LLC Domestic (U.S.) Inventor Share 83.3% 66.7% 83.3% 80.0%
4 Patent Counts, all shares
Rick oversees the Ropes and Gray Strikeforce Technologies team:
Rick McCaulley is chair of Ropes & Gray’s nationally-recognized IP litigation practice. He brings to bear more than 20 years of experience handling complex patent, trade secret and antitrust disputes, serving as lead counsel in jury and bench trials in U.S. federal courts and before the PTAB, and advising on substantial matters in international courts.
With a degree and deep background in biomedical engineering, Rick has represented major pharmaceutical and medical device companies, including Bausch & Lomb, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Biomet, GN Resound and Nevro, on Hatch-Waxman/ANDA litigation and other types of patent disputes.
Recognized for his results in the courtroom on cases involving complex technologies, Rick has also become the go-to litigator for many high-tech companies.
As co-founder of a highly-successful medical device company, Rick understands the strategic value of a company’s IP and how to protect it. It’s one of the reasons clients call upon Rick to handle matters that are of the highest strategic importance to their business. He brings the perspective of a seasoned trial lawyer and business owner to his client’s cases, and has built a world-class reputation for delivering the business results they need.
Rick speaks regularly on patent issues, trial strategies, the effective use of budgeting and legal project management tools, and a variety of other topics. He is recognized for his expertise and results by Chambers USA, Legal 500, Best Lawyers, Managing IP, and Euromoney, among others.
EXPERIENCE
Representative Life Sciences Matters
AstraZeneca v. Breath, Ltd. et al. (D.N.J.) – Represent AstraZeneca in ANDA litigation involving Pulmicort Respules®, a nebulized corticosteroid used to treat asthma.
King Pharmaceuticals et al. v. Teva Parenterals et al. (D. Del.) – Represented Pfizer subsidiaries, King Pharmaceuticals and Meridian Medical Technologies, in ANDA litigation involving King’s EpiPen® epinephrine auto-injector product.
Baxter, Inc. v. Minrad (D. Del.) – Represented Baxter in ANDA litigation involving anesthesia products.
Gian Biologics, LLC v. Biomet, Inc. (D. Del.) – Represented Biomet in a patent infringement action involving autologous blood separation technology.
CIBA Vision v. Bausch & Lomb (N.D. Ga.) – Represented Bausch & Lomb in a patent infringement action related to polymer compositions and morphology for contact lenses.
SciMed Life Systems, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (N.D. Cal; Fed. Cir.) – Represented Advanced Cardiovascular Systems in a patent infringement action related to rapid exchange catheter systems.
Süd Chemie, Inc. v. CSP Technologies, Inc. (S.D. Ind.) – Represent CSP Technologies in a patent infringement action related to desiccant-entrained polymer container systems for storing and dispensing drugs and drug products.
ICU Medical Systems, Inc. v. Alaris (C.D. Cal.) – Represented Alaris in a patent infringement action involving valve systems for intravenous drug delivery.
Edwards Lifesciences, LLC v. Cook Incorporated (N.D. Cal.) – Represented Edwards Lifesciences in patent litigation involving intraluminal grafts for treating aortic aneurisms.
Edwards Lifesciences, LLC v. Gore (N.D. Cal.) – Represented Edwards Lifesciences in patent litigation involving intraluminal grafts for treating aortic aneurisms.
E. I. duPont v. Cardinal Health (D. Tenn.) – Represented Cardinal Health in a patent infringement action involving polymer and fiber compositions for medical products.
Representative Matters Involving Other Technologies
Activision T.V., Inc. et al. v. Richardson Electronics, Inc. et al. (N.D. Ill.) – Represented NEC Display Solutions in a patent infringement case relating to digital display technology.
RR Donnelley & Sons Company v. Xerox Corporation (N.D. Ill.) – Represent RR Donnelley in a patent infringement case relating to variable data printing technology.
Linksmart Wireless Tech. v. AT&T Mobility (E.D. Tex.) – Represented AT&T in a patent infringement action related to wireless access authentication protocols and rule implementation for roaming internet users.
PUBLICATIONS
Author of U.S. Chapter, “Patents 2016: Getting the Deal Through,” (May 2016)
Quoted, “Jordan Verdict A Warning For Advertisers On Image Use,” Law360 (Aug. 24, 2015) (Subscription required)
PRESENTATIONS
Speaker, “The Future of Trade Secrets and the DTSA,” MIP Trade Secrets Forum (September 27, 2016)
Speaker, “The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 – What You Need to Know,” Association of Corporate Counsel (June 15-16, 2016)
Speaker, “Critical Issues in Trade Secrets & Economic Espionage,” Ropes & Gray’s West Cost Lunchtime Legal Briefing (March 31, 2016)
Speaker, “Winning on Either Side of the “v.”: How to Succeed as a Patent Challenger or Defender,” Ropes & Gray and the ACC on Post-Grant Patent Challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Conference (January 13, 2016)
Speaker, “Evaluating the Merits of Bringing A Declaratory Judgment Action,” ACI Paragraph IV Conference (October 1, 2015)
Speaker, “Exploring the Parallel World of IPR Proceedings,” ACI Medical Device Patents Conference (March 4, 2015)
Speaker, “Litigation Issues,” PLI: Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2015: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing (May 14, 2015)
Speaker, “New System Challenges: The European Unitary Patent System and PTAB,” FCBA International Series (October 21, 2014)
“Perspectives for European Lawyers on the New U.S. Patent Trial and Appeals Board as a Forum for Resolving Hi-Tech Patent Validity,” C5 Hi-Tech Patents: IPR Strategies & Litigation Conference (July 1, 2014)
“Hot Venues: Delaware, Texas, Chicago & California,” Ropes & Gray IPMC Financial Services Roundtable (April 7, 2014)
Speaker, “Evaluating the Merits of Bringing A Declaratory Judgment Action,” ACI Paragraph IV Conference (October 1, 2015)
Speaker, “Exploring the Parallel World of IPR Proceedings,” ACI Medical Device Patents Conference (March 4, 2015)
Speaker, “Litigation Issues,” PLI: Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2015: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing (May 14, 2015)
Speaker, “New System Challenges: The European Unitary Patent System and PTAB,” FCBA International Series (October 21, 2014)
Speaker, “Europe’s Unitary Patent System: What’s Next for U.S. Medical Device Companies?” BAIMA Luncheon Seminar, Silicon Valley (March 13, 2013)
Of course, Ropes and Gray isn't bad either...
IP Litigation:
With over 110 attorneys worldwide dedicated to patent litigation, Ropes & Gray’s IP litigation group offers clients seamless global service and successful solutions to their most critical disputes.
OVERVIEW
Winning is the core of the Ropes & Gray intellectual property group. For over 130 years, our IP group has succeeded in protecting and enforcing our clients’ interests in high-stakes litigation. Clients rely on our experienced IP litigators for the key, “bet-the-company” cases that have the ability to shape business, the marketplace and competition.
With offices across the United States, as well as in Japan and South Korea, our team is prepared to serve our clients’ interests in response to any IP challenge, anywhere in the world.
Comprehensive Capabilities
Clients rely on Ropes & Gray’s trial lawyers not only to evaluate and assert patents against infringing competitors, but also to defend against charges of infringement, no matter how or where they arise. Our teams pair a thorough understanding of complex, cutting-edge technologies with a mastery of the nuances of patent law.
Our professionals possess over 150 degrees in disciplines such as electrical engineering, organic and synthetic chemistry, computer science, pharmacology, biochemistry, molecular and cellular biology, neurobiology, immunology, genetics, chemical engineering, biophysics, polymer science and aerospace engineering.
Our deep bench of “first chair” trial lawyers and our unparalleled technical capabilities ensure that the Ropes & Gray team can communicate with the most advanced technical experts and convey that information in a clear and persuasive manner to judges and juries alike.
We draw on years of experience and training to harness these resources and manage all phases of complex litigation. Our attorneys represent companies at both the trial and appellate levels, in key patent litigation courts across the nation. We also litigate matters before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and tribunals around the world, where we work collaboratively with experienced local council.
Blank Rome is a big boy as well:
Blank Rome’s Intellectual Property group has received significant recognition in 2016. The Firm was recognized as a leading trademark practice for the seventh year in a row by World Trademark Review 1000 and ranked top-tier for Litigation - Intellectual Property by U.S. News-Best Lawyers®. In October, Blank Rome’s Philadelphia office was ranked as one of the top ten intellectual property law firms and in September, Blank Rome’s Houston office was also ranked as one of the top ten largest IP firms by the Houston Business Journal.
Ram, what???? Does this even matter with Ropes and Gray and Blank Rome jointly fighting seven infringers? Will all seven say I'm going to court even if they know they will have to pay a big payout??? Mark just said that operating money is no longer an issue? How did that happen? Let's not get sidetracked from seeing the big picture here.
I completely agree. SFOR is a very rare opportunity that all of us can to varying degrees be activists in our own investment and Mark should be aware of our activities as well. Also, Mark is certainly bright enough to determine who are investors and flippers and act accordingly.
Even if the numbers for Q1 are low like Mark said it would someone would have to be mindless you sell at 1.4 pennies per share knowing that at any moment settlement can be announced or multiple settlements and send this thing through the roof! I'm in hibernation until the settlement party begins...I may hibernate until the 50th settlement is announced too...I think after the 50th settlement the PPS should be at least 10 cents don't you think...:)
What if they have settled and agreed on a NDA? Could they announce the settlement then?
Genius!! INFRINGERS are in deep trouble. 'Expect numbers from our seven litigations not in play'!!
I thought I saw somewhere that SFOR products will be on HSN again multiple times. I'll try to confirm.
We'll see. Hope you're in position!
Somebody knows something... Excellent post! This is exciting.
Strikeforce could announce a one off payment, or royalty compensation type agreement, or both, at any time this year
Ropes and Gray and Black Rome together going after the first SEVEN INFRINGERS!
Keith A. Rutherford
Blank Rome Partner
Houston, TX
v. +1.713.632.8636
f. +1.713.228.6605
CHAIR, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND TECHNOLOGY PRACTICE GROUP
Keith Rutherford concentrates his intellectual property practice on patent litigation, IP strategy, pre-litigation conflict resolution, licensing/deal negotiations, analysis of patent portfolios both for offensive and defensive purposes, opinion work, and prosecution management.
Mr. Rutherford brings years of outside law firm experience coupled with his extensive in-house legal experience to bear on solving clients’ problems. He has handled cases where the alleged sales base at risk exceeded a billion dollars, and explores cost-effective alternatives and early resolution of disputes for clients without the need for litigation.
He has negotiated numerous patent licenses and other IP-related agreements, as well as managed analyses of patent portfolios ranging from small to those containing thousands of patents. He works in a number of technology areas, with particular emphasis in the electronics, computing, software, Internet, telecommunications, high technology, VoIP, and oilfield industries.
SERVICES
Intellectual Property
IP Litigation
Patent
IP Licensing & Contracts
Litigation
Cybersecurity & Data Privacy
INDUSTRIES
Software
Energy
Telecommunications
Computing
Networking
Security
ADMISSIONS
Texas
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Texas
U.S. District Court - Northern District of California
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Indiana
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
U.S. District Court - Southern District of Texas
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
EDUCATION
University of Texas School of Law, JD, with honors
The University of Texas at Austin, BS, with honors
RECOGNITIONS
AV-Preeminent, by Martindale-Hubbell
“Best Lawyer in America” for Intellectual Property, by IP Law and Business Magazine
2009–2014, “Super Lawyer” in IP Litigation, by Texas Super Lawyers
2008–2017, Litigation – Patent, and Intellectual Property; Patent Law; Copyright Law; and Trademark Law, listed in Best Lawyers in America©
2013, “Top Rated Lawyer” in IP Law, by ALM
2016, Copyright Law “Lawyer of the Year” in Houston, by Best Lawyers®
Longs, tomorrow everything could change. What if we're told tomorrow that multiple lawsuits have been settled??? I understand the shorts doing what they do, but I want to be in position and ready for the surprise!! No one will remember where we're at today if that happens.
Interesting article from Insider Financial today:
Insider Financial
Here's What We're Looking For From Strikeforce Technologies Inc (OTCMKTS:SFOR) Going Forward
By Chris Sandburg / in Momentum & Growth, Momentum Stocks, Stocks, Tech / on Thursday, 27 Apr 2017 12:27 PM
On April 17, 2017, Strikeforce Technologies Inc (OTCMKTS:SFOR) put out what it refers to as its State of the Union release. The report detailed some financials from 2016 (and compared said financials to the corresponding figures during 2015) and went on to highlight the company’s position in the market.
This is one we’ve come back to on a number of occasions over the last year, and in light of the recent update, we’re going to take a look at the company one more time with the goal of realigning our bias.
So, here goes.
For those new to Strikeforce, this one’s a cyber security technology play, with a focus on consumer products. It’s got a suite of products on the market right now, each of which targets a different aspect of IT tech. We won’t go into these products here as we’ve done so plenty of times before, but as a quick introduction, there are three primary products that comprise the company’s portfolio: ProtectID, GuardedID and MobileTrust.
The first is a two-factor authentication technology and the latter two are designed to protect against a range of cyber security threats – keylogging, clickjacking etc. – for both desktop and mobile devices.
Our thesis for this one to date has been this: that the company has spent a long time trying to get these products to market, and more specifically trying to get them in the hands of customers, but its efforts have been stymied somewhat by a muted consumer demand for cyber security (outside of the standard anti-virus type products). Right now, however, cybersecurity is a hot topic. Trump, Russia, North Korea, Democratic email leaks – all these things are keeping security in the mainstream news, and this sort of exposure is going to (and already is proving to) filter through to mainstream public conscience.
And the recent release from Strikeforce reinforces this thesis. Management pointed towards the threat of security breaches being taken far more seriously now by all operators than ever before, and that the company is positioned to take advantage of this shift in perception is – in our eyes – indicative of a real chance for upside revaluation.
So what did the numbers tell us?
For the year to December 31, 2016, Strikeforce pulled in a little over $384K in revenues. This compares to the $271K reported a year earlier – a 42% increase across the period. That’s not great in terms of top line, but it’s a decent shift up, and we expect that the numbers should really start to inflate this year in line with the above mentioned increased demand in the market.
Next earnings are due to hit press mid May, and while they’ll be well worth keeping an eye on, we’re not expecting fireworks. The real ramp up is going to come during the second half of this year, as the company’s retail channels start to filter through to revenue collection. As such, if the numbers are perceived to disappoint (which may be the case), any dip on the response could be a nice opportunity to pick up a discount exposure on a misinterpretation, ahead of realignment when the later quarters’ numbers hit press.
There’s also the potential for litigation related windfalls. This company won out against Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT) at the beginning of last year when it fought to reinforce the validity of a two factor authentication patent. This patent is now subject to seven new litigations, and with the Microsoft win in place to serve as precedent, there’s a good chance that Strikeforce could announce a one off payment, or royalty compensation type agreement, or both, at any time over the next few quarters.
Nothing’s guaranteed, of course. There’s always a dilution risk at this end of the space, especially when it comes to a tech company trying to establish a product suite in a growing market. Strikeforce is going to need funds to expand into its potential (setting aside the potential for any litigation income for a second) and this capital is going to come from equity issue, in all likelihood.
At its current market cap, however, there’s a lot of room for value add before a raise is necessary, and any run should help to offset the impact of an issue longer term.
Is this true?