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.
I remember I was down70% back in the trips. I had bought too high at .002 and this was hitting .0008. Averaged down and the next week SFOR started taking off. I was shaken upside down and sold my shares on my first heart attack back at .005 when the huge drop driven by a large group happened. I had to buy my shares back at a higher price.
Long story short, nothing has changed except for the impatient holders that thought they would make 100k in a month.
Maybe with other tickers like OWCP THAT HAD A MAD RUSH, (wish I had stayed longer) but with a legitimate company like this, with actual products close to my home and revenue it will take time. If the lawsuits settle in the coming weeks it will be a plus but remember why we are here
Maybe. The only ones that will show up are the ones holding before oct 7th and looks like it's only the core guys from the beginning.
Truth be told I have up to 20k to go into this on top of my original investment . I was ready to pull the trigger above .01 but that video was a gift from Kay. I kind of feel bad for saying this but it is what it is you know. I'm down 15k today but still above my initial position.
Nothing has changed for the investors that were planning on staying here past these lawsuits and I'm one of them
Truth is you are not screwed at all. You know what's coming
a pre market trade of 10000 shares at .0107
I always wondered
I'll drink a water with ya
He wants to take us out for drinks after the meeting
That video has a purpose.
may be he needed to address something before tomorrow, something he felt he might have said too much to someone or was taken out of context.
IMO
Been there done that. Learned my lesson with SFOR back in the .003s
I see what you did there...
Lol. No worries. The pilots probably have a crash pad close to Dulles and can get to the tarmac in 20 minutes
Lmao
I wonder if there's a reason why the QandA blog was put out today Oct 25th.
There's a shareholders meeting 3 weeks from now where he could address these questions.
We will find out soon if these lawsuits will keep going or they have reached a settlement which obviously cannot be disclosed.
Next two weeks starting tomorrow will be interesting!!
Is it a private video ? I can't find it, i can only get to it if I click on the link here
here one more time
https://support.strikeforcecpg.com/kb/article/79-guardedid-does-not-currently-operate-on-mac-os-x-1012-sierra
The current version of GuardedID® for Mac OS X does not operate on macOS Sierra Version 10.12 due to an internal change by Apple to the keyboard functions.
If you are a current GuardedID MAC user and want to continue being protected by GuardedID then do NOT upgrade to version 10.12 Sierra.
StrikeForce has opened a developer’s support case with Apple, notifying them that this change is preventing our software from protecting keystrokes. We are waiting for a response from Apple.
We have no other information at this time. Once a solution is available we will release an update to GuardedID.
CORRECT, YES.
HOPEFULLY LATER THAN SOONER SO I CAN LOAD MORE!!
No problem, takes a couple of minutes.
This is the latest relevant "ORDER" entered on all 3 cases. The key points are in BOLD
14 Days prior to Nov 9th is tomorrow the 26th.
Microsoft'd case was closed exactly 14 days prior to their meeting
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CHAMBERS OF USPO & COURTHOUSE
MARK FALK 1 FEDERAL SQ., ROOM 457
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE NEWARK, NJ 07101
(973) 645-3110
September 27, 2016
COUNSEL OF RECORD
LETTER ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 16
Re: Strikeforce Technologies, Inc. v. Centrify Corporation
Civil Action No. 16-3574 (JMV)
Dear Counsel:
A scheduling conference shall be conducted before the Undersigned on November 9, 2016
at 11:00 a.m. at the U.S. Post Office and Courthouse, 1 Federal Square, Fourth Floor, Newark, New
Jersey. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16.1 and L. Civ. R. 16.1(a).
Counsel are advised that the early disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 will be
enforced. Therefore, counsel shall immediately exchange the following information without a
formal discovery request:
• contested facts,
• identities of individuals likely to have knowledge of discoverable facts,
• documents and things in the possession of counsel or the party,
• identities of experts and their opinions,
• insurance agreements in force, and
• statement of the basis for any damages claimed.
At least fourteen (14) days prior to the conference scheduled herein, counsel shall personally
meet and confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), and shall submit a discovery plan to the
undersigned not later than 72 hours prior to the conference with the Court. The discovery plan may
include a summary of the status of settlement negotiations.
At the conference with the Court, all parties who are not appearing pro se must be
represented by counsel who shall have full authority to bind their client in all pretrial matters.
Clients or persons with authority over the matter shall be available by telephone. See L. Civ. R.
16.1(a).
Counsel for plaintiff(s) shall notify any party who hereafter enters an appearance of
the above conference and forward to that party a copy of this Order.
The parties must advise this Court immediately if this action has been settled or terminated
so that the above conference may be cancelled.
Failure to comply with the terms herein may result in the imposition of sanctions.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Mark Falk
MARK FALK
United States Magistrate Judge
Lets hope they come through!
Lately I have seen DUO come up at the top of google search, for example googling two factor authentication, Duo pops up most of the time.
I have not been to the DUO website on my work computer so I know its not tracked advertisement. They seem to be pushing their products a lot more now.
Exactly, a lot of newer investors have forgotten or have not looked through these cases and read the info on them. Everything points in the direction of SFOR being successful with these 3 cases.
haha!! Lets do it!
I'm kind of bummed out, I cant get my hands on more funds until next week or so, damn bank keeps asking too many questions. If SFOR takes off this week or early next week I will miss out on MASSIVE gains.
very true, they did not file a counter suit, they have just been going with the flow all along, which is kind of weird.
Plus if you remember on their answer to SFOR's claim, they pretty much said that if they were infringing on the patent they did not do it willingly pretty much.
I will have my PACER account open all day tomorrow and the next two weeks, can't wait!!!
for anyone that would also like to stay on top of it, here is the link. create an account and pay 10 cents per page viewed, which is really not much.
https://www.pacer.gov/
NOTHING WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN ON THE 24TH, MEETING DATE IS NOV 9TH AND IN UP TO 14 DAYS BEFORE NOV 9TH, THE COMPANIES NEED TO TELL THE COURT WHERE ARE THEY CURRENTLY IN THEIR NEGOTIATIONS.
SO...... ANYTIME DURING OCTOBER 26TH TO NOV 9TH WE CAN EXPECT TO HEAR SOMETHING IF, THE HAVE REACHED A SETTLEMENT OR IF THEY WILL PROCEED TO GO TO COURT AND HAVE A TRIAL BY JURY.
So......
I need more info on these bogus lawsuits please. Links?
How deep are you in this? I remember saying you bought 100k recently
Ourselves!
I need more info on these bogus lawsuits please. Links?
Awesome post!
It doesn't matter I was not in it. Were you?
Night night!
A patent troll.....
Patent trolls are neither using nor marketing the inventions covered by their patents, but instead plan to make money by threatening or filing lawsuits
Purchases a patent, often from a bankrupt firm, and then sues another company by claiming that one of its products infringes on the purchased patent;
Enforces patents against purported infringers without itself intending to manufacture the patented product or supply the patented service
Enforces patents but has no manufacturing or research base
Focuses its efforts solely on enforcing patent rights or
Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers.
The FTC found that defendant MPHJ had sent letters to more than 16,000 small to mid-size businesses threatening patent infringement lawsuits if the companies did not comply with its demand for licensing fees of $1,000 to $1,200 per employee, but never making preparations for such lawsuits.
The document states that the court did not allow Microsoft to be added as a defendant to the current case, but the court did not have an issue if Strikeforce wanted to start litigation against Microsoft in a different suit.
Phonefactor did not want to provide discovery documents past a certain date because the documents belonged to Microsoft.
What's the purpose of your link?
Yes, a lot of folks missed that they were two lawsuits
1:15-cv-00465-RGA StrikeForce Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
1:13-cv-00490-RGA-MPT StrikeForce Technologies Inc. v. PhoneFactor Inc.
You are correct.
Wow, I understand you. But, you know there's going to be a run in a a couple of weeks before November 9th. If you don't want to invest anymore, then ride the wave and flip it. IMO
We all now that when time comes there will be a reverse split. By that time hopefully you made your money back and then some.
I meant that cafe in the same business center.
Are we having dinner at the cafeteria?