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.
“…one of several offers…”. BS…there has only been a single offer from Dr. Gil mentioned.
Just like 2nd grade math class, work should be shown when arriving at such BS answers!
Well considering nothing would happen in Waco before all responses are in, most who follow the cases understand the Bigs are continuing to play the delay game and ask for an extension until mid-October so that’s when the next filings are due. Then there will be more delay games in motioning for a venue change in hopes of getting the cases back to the Bigs favorable courts in N CA…remind us again who doesn’t want the cases to ever get to the jury trial. Emil & Hudnell have been trying to move these cases along but have met nothing but obstruction, delays, & lies. If I didn’t know any better, I’d think I were watching a session of Congress!
Weird how the vague version of the story was posted rather than the full detailed version including names of all involved…didn’t see any names associated with VPLM listed, but then again, facts are stubborn things here!
https://vancouversun.com/business/british-columbians-face-u-s-criminal-civil-charges-over-alleged-massive-illegal-stock-scheme
Can’t…doesn’t have the receipts…only BS vague statements!
You know Stef…facts are stubborn things. Still waiting for that full stockholders listing. LMFAO!
Name one!
Well just for fun, which company shows more shareholders listed without digging into the details of financial statements? Who’s lying? 455 vs 1? Who’s the real scam here? Who’s going to be adding to authorized shares soon? One guess…and Emil is the Caron answer!
#SMFH
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/VPLM/security
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/FUNN/security
If you feel Emil is lying, please show us the full stockholder list for another penny stock! C’mon, dazzle us with some brilliance here.
We’ll wait!
Sure thing…
Right? How many spineless coward CEOS have the cajones to take on 3 trillion dollar companies stealing their patents? Only 1 that I know!
Rapz, thanks for the info. That’s thinking logically again…be careful logic is frowned upon by many when it comes to understanding VPLM.
Tough to show infringement of the judge doesn’t allow a court case to ever get to a stage of the trial to prove it. This is like buying a Boston Marathon medal on eBay then telling everyone you ran the race.
Exactly SD. Cognitive dissonance at its finest on display by Apple in their first ever changing responses.
Right…Don’t forget when one has a valid patent and any other company knowingly or unknowing uses the patented technology, that’s called INFRINGEMENT. Seems kind of odd that the Bigs headed right to tech-friendly N CA court and pushed to invalidate the VPLM patents under 101 after failing in the PTAB FWD appeal. Pushing for invalidation is usually the first play in the slimy legal playbook when the accused infringers don’t have the facts on their side. Let’s see what happens in Waco with an unbiased & knowledgeable judge running the show!
Lol DB. True story… “No one is required to practice PATIENCE, just as no one is required to hold/buy VPLM!! All free will!” Just like no one is required to display intelligent but it sure would help in the understanding of what’s going on with VPLM and how the stock market works.
Basic stuff here. It’s neither a good idea to litigate via PR nor show up a judge in public by acting as if VPLM already won the case. This really isn’t difficult to understand if ever been in front of a judge before…even in traffic court!
VoIP-Pal Provides a Summary of Recent Favorable Court Decisions Regarding its Pending Patent Litigations in the U.S District Courts in Northern District of California and the Western District of Texas
VoIP-Pal.com Inc. ("VoIP-Pal", "Company") (OTCQB: VPLM) is pleased to provide a summary regarding its current patent litigation cases and to clarify some of the recent court rulings.
Last month the U.S. District Court in the North District of California (NDCAL) denied administrative motions by Apple and AT&T asking the court to relate their declaratory-judgment actions against VoIP-Pal's Mobile Gateway patent lawsuit to their previously filed declaratory-judgment actions against VoIP-Pal's RBR continuation patent lawsuits.
Earlier this month the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas (WDTX), Waco Division denied requests from the defendants, Apple, AT&T and Verizon to stay VoIP-Pal's existing lawsuits in the WDTX. In doing so, the Court rejected the defendants' argument that the 2021 Mobile Gateway cases in WDTX were "substantially similar" to the 2021 RBR continuation cases in NDCAL.
"We are very pleased with these outcomes so far," said VoIP-Pal CEO, Emil Malak. "Hopefully these favorable decisions will be the first steps towards having our cases move forward in the Western District of Texas. We believe that our claims have merit, and we look forward to a favorable resolution of these matters. Patience is a virtue."
Lol…math is hard. I think this is called “reverse dumping”
Total Bullshit. This isn’t a criminal case. Patent cases are civil proceedings and there is no “presumption of innocence” for either side.
In patent cases that are run correctly, there is a presumption of validity for the patents which would tilt the advantage towards the patent holder.
The plaintiff still has to provide evidence & prove infringement to the court. Tough to do in VPLM’s case when the corrupt judge & the Bigs sidestep claims construction hearings and shoot right to a invalidity under 101. So much for presumption of validity!
That’s like starting the Boston marathon a mile from the finish line then saying my final time broke the 2 hour mark!
Maybe high risk/high reward stocks aren’t for everyone if the feeling is the CEO is deceiving the shareholders & one can’t live with being invested in a stock with large price variability.
Because the market over reacted, or possibly ongoing stock price manipulation by the bigs, some are now asking for a better PR to pump up the stock price?
Quote:
“…Emil has unfortunately chosen deceit as the form of governance.”
I have no issues with what the company put out. By following the court cases, the news made sense. No company should make public their litigation strategy.
As far as new ruling from Albright, I check the case daily and there’s no news ruling. Facebook filed a motion opposing dismissal that hit the docket today. That’s the only new filing in Albright’s court that shows on the Waco dockets. If you’ve seen different info, please enlighten the board.
Most investors? Na, maybe some who don’t understand how patent cases work, are desperate to get out, or need a quick adrenaline hit to support a fictional belief in their stock picking abilities.
A good investor makes their money at the entry point and if the due diligence was done correctly, doesn’t worry about the cyclical gyrations of the share price. If one doesn’t have the stones for the uncertainty in patent plays, then maybe savings bonds or hiding money between mattresses would have been better options.
Facts are stubborn things DB!
Touché
Gifted to his own trust is dumping? It’s all right there on the form.
Agree. Koh should be a non-factor in Waco since she already denied the DJ request to relate RBR to Mobile Gateway. Judge Donato still has am open DJ case which I suspect Hudnell will file a motion for dismissal, possibly next week, since the first to file issue is now put to bed.
The wheels of Justice turn a bit faster in Waco. Could still go either way but at least we’re fighting in a neutral venue so the merits of the patents will stand on their own.
Agree 100%
Not true...by Albright declaring that Waco is the first filed court, the cases will move forward in Waco. He also denied the Bigs motion for a stay which says we ain't waiting on N CA for cases that have been delcared unrelated to the Mobile Gateway patent.
Now let's see what kind of BS the Bigs try to throw at Albright & VPLM.
It's Game On in Waco!
I guess some really do understand VPLM and the cases at hand.
For everyones viewing pleasure!
INC.,
Defendants
Case 6:21-cv-00670-ADA Document 20 Filed 09/03/21 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC., § Plaintiff §
-vs- § APPLE INC., Defendant § §
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC., § Plaintiff §
-vs- §
AT&T SERVICES, INC., AT&T § MOBILITY LLC, AT&T, § CORPORATION, Defendants §
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC., § Plaintiff §
-vs- §
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., § CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, VERIZON § SERVICES CORP., VERIZON § BUSINESS NETWORK SERVICES,
6:21-CV-00670-ADA
6:21-CV-00671-ADA
ORDER
6:21-CV-00672-ADA
Before the Court is Plaintiff VoIP-Pal’s Application for Temporary Restriction Order and Preliminary Injunction requesting this Court to temporarily restrain and enjoin Defendants Apple, AT&T, and Verizon from pursing their 2021 declaratory judgement actions filed in the
1
Case 6:21-cv-00670-ADA Document 20 Filed 09/03/21 Page 2 of 3
Northern District of California (“NDCA”). Temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions are extraordinary remedies. Byrum v. Landreth, 566 F.3d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 2009). A court may only issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction if the movant establishes: “(1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, (2) a substantial threat of irreparable injury if the injunction is not issued, (3) that the threatened injury if the injunction is denied outweighs any harm that will result if the injunction is granted, and (4) that the grant of an injunction will not disserve the public interest.” Id. In its application for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, VoIP-Pal does not try to establish any of the above factors. Instead, VoIP-Pal relies on a 32-year-old case from the Northern District of Texas (Superior Sav. Ass’n. v. Bank of Dallas, 705 F. Supp. 326, 328 (N.D. Tex. 1989)) for its proposition that this Court has the authority to enjoin the defendants from pursuing their declaratory judgement actions based on the “first-to-file” rule. Dkt. 14 at 9-10. “The ‘first-to-file’ rule is a doctrine of federal comity, intended to avoid conflicting decisions and promote judicial efficiency, that generally favors pursuing only the first-filed action when multiple lawsuits involving the same claims are filed in different jurisdictions.” Commc’ns Test Design, Inc. v. Contec, LLC, 952 F.3d 1356, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (quotation and citation omitted). Under the first-to-file rule, a district court presiding over a second-filed action may choose to stay, transfer, or dismiss the later-filed duplicative action. Id. However, this Court is not aware of any, and the plaintiff has not cited any, controlling Fifth Circuit or Federal Circuit law that authorizes a district court presiding over a first-filed action to enjoin a party from pursuing a second-filed action in a different court under the “first-to-file” rule. And the Court does not think the “first-to-file” rule justifies the extraordinary remedy of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction.
2
Case 6:21-cv-00670-ADA Document 20 Filed 09/03/21 Page 3 of 3
Therefore, the Court DENIES VoIP-Pal’s application for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
In their Response, Defendants Apple, AT&T, and Verizon request this Court to stay the above-titled cases until the NDCA decides whether to relate Defendants’ 2021 declaratory judgment actions to the 2020 California cases currently pending before Judge Lucy Koh. Dkt. 16 at 9, 14-20. Defendants argue that there is “substantial overlap” between the instant cases and the 2020 California cases (and the previous 2016 and 2018 California cases before Judge Koh) because “all of the patents include an overlapping inventor and related to the same subject matter.” Id. at 9. The Court is not persuaded that having one overlapping inventor and common subject matter makes the instant cases substantially similar to the 2020 California cases. As the Defendants admits, the ’234 and ’721 patents asserted in the instant cases “stem from a different patent family than the patents in the 2016, 2018, and 2020 Cases.” Id. Therefore, the Court does not think a stay is justified under such circumstances.
It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff VoIP-Pal’s Application for Temporary Restriction Order and Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that Defendants Apple, AT&T, and Verizon’s request to stay the instant cases are also DENIED.
SIGNED this 3rd day of September, 2021.
ALAN D ALBRIGHT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
And let’s not forget about Little Timmy spying on everyone. Talk about a surveillance state!
I hope Team VPLM doesn’t have iPhones. Apple already has a stooley in Koh, the VPLM don’t need to help Apple further by giving info directly to the Siri spy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/02/apple-siri-lawsuit-privacy/
“Lawsuits say Siri and Google are listening, even when they’re not supposed to
The lawsuits allege the technology is turning on when not activated and using the information for marketing.”
Tim Cook & Apple still under immense pressure around the world for their strong arming & pilfering of small app developers but tell us again how allegedly corrupt Emil is. Last time I checked, VPLM DOESN’T HAVE ANY GOVERNMENTS INVESTIGATING THEM!
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/03/business/dealbook/apple-app-store-antitrust.html?smid=url-share
“Analysts who track Apple said that these changes won’t significantly affect the tech giant’s $20 billion App Store business. Rather, The Times’s Kellen Browning and Daisuke Wakabayashi report, the moves are a strategic retreat, an effort by Apple to repel threats that would be more damaging to its bottom line. (Apple declined to comment.)
Apple is under pressure from regulators around the world who have accused it of exerting too much control over developers who sell products in its App Store. The South Korean Parliament on Tuesday passed a bill that would ban app stores from forcing developers to use only their proprietary payment systems. Apple also faces antitrust investigations in the U.S., the E.U., Britain and India. And it is awaiting the verdict in a lawsuit brought by Epic Games, which sought to avoid Apple’s commissions altogether
Ding ding ding…give limestone a cigar!
Albright will rule when he rules. The court cases are being monitored for updates.
DB - You’re a better man than me. I neither have the time nor the crayons to continue to try to explain basic stuff here any longer. Total waste of time & energy related to VPLM.
IMO, The cards will reveal themselves very, very soon. Even when our hand shows 4 Aces, we’ll continue to hear our cards are a bunch of worthlessness Jokers!
Highly doubtful!
BFD! Has been much higher in the past.
Well the case is now dismissed but Koh left the door open for Twitter to petition for attorney fees and you can bet they will. Unless a different settlement was reached but that seems doubtful.
Kind of feels like the tide of BS from N CA is starting to turn in VPLM’s favor. Time will tell. Next up…decision in Waco on TRO/Injunction!
Not for a moment!
N CA - Twitter case dismissed! 5:20-CV-02397