is... buying more shares
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.
Is there a signed order? I looked on PACER and never saw an order. I saw the motion to Change Venue and an UNSIGNED order given to the judge as a courtesy to sign if, and ONLY if, he actually grants the order.
But not signed and actually granted as per this afternoon.
So I had a friend login to PACER and he also looked and he only saw the motion (13 pages) as well as several attachments (exhibits, proposed order). But no docket with a signed and granted order from the court.
You have to be very careful on PACER to not confuse "proposed orders" drafted by the plaintiffs or defendants using their own language, with actual orders written and signed by the court.
Assuming the judge grants a motion, he will sometimes use the proposed order given to him as a courtesy and will just sign it. Sometimes he won't and will draft his own order with words of his choosing.
And sometimes he won't agree and will not grant an order at all.
Still trusting this headline mistake? There was no follow up story from any reputable news source and VRNG's own PR contradicts the alleged "oral deal".
Why do you think someone messed up? I trust this information because it comes from Ameritrade, very thrusworthy... Cover shorties!
Agreed. Nice day indeed.
CAFC is most likely not going to revisit any issues it already decided. Either party would have to raise new issues based on how the mini trial went and/or the laws would have to have changed since the time of the remand order.
There are other remedies after a remand order that a party is more likely to take, such as an en banc rehearing of the original appeal or even a petition for a writ of certiorari (asking SCOTUS to rule on the matter). Of course all of these are long shots.
remand means "to send back"
Historically the Federal Circuit has exercised its authority to reverse jury awards in patent infringement cases (usually downward, however). But since VRNG is asking for a remand of the issue back to HJJ's court, that means to me it is most likely that any victory for VRNG on this issue will be in the form of the mini-trial they have so requested.
Keep in mind, I am not a lawyer.
VRNG is asking the Federal Circuit to remand the jury calculation issue.
"Because the $30,496,155 figure is not supported by the evidence, this Court should order a remand limited to applying the adjudged royalty rate to a supportable royalty base in the relevant time period."
Yes. The appeal deals with the court's ruling to disallow VRNG's motion for a new trial on damages.
I know it is 127 pages, but you really should read VRNG's reply brief to the CAFC. The part covering jury error/new trial begins on page 91 of the PDF document.
Well, of course. The laches ruling eliminated hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of millions in potential past damages.
Should VRNG prevail on the laches issue, that would be a major catalyst to the stock price. However, the reality is that this ruling is unlikely to be overturned. I hope to be wrong, obviously. I'm just saying I for one am not getting my hopes up on the laches issue being reversed.
I believe there are three appeals at the Federal Circuit.
First one deals with the judgement and laches and things relating to the trial and pre-trial.
The second appeal is for supplemental damages and interest awarded.
The third appeal will cover the RR decision related to future royalties.
(Today's PR regarding the oral hearing schedule is for the primary appeal of the judgement and VRNG's cross appeal for Laches, etc. Regardless of what dreamers and pumpers believe, no actual "deal" has been struck by the parties... written or "oral". LOL)
Some people are so entrenched in their confirmation bias, they will believe anything that is positive. Such as false rumors that make no sense or obvious typos from a fat fingered data entry intern.
The interwebs is great because it brings so many different people together into the same community. No IQ test required.
I doubt I will be left behind, but appreciate your concern.
Please check back when details of the "oral deal" are released publicly. LMAO
I think the UPIP deal is another confirmation of how Telecom deals with small NPEs can be very rewarding to both companies.
The UPIP/ERIC partnership is structured similarly to the VRNG/NOK partnership in that both parties share in future patent licensing royalties. We saw how this fragmentation worked previously with Nokia/ Microsoft and (now privately held) Mosiad.
I like the VRNG deal better, in terms of structure. And I think VRNG's patents (acquired through ) Nokia are stronger and deeper than UPIP's patents... however, I do like that ERIC will continue to give patents to UPIP going forward and I am happy for UPIP being able to generate so much money.
LOL because I read the actual press release.
If you aren't getting your information directly from the source, you will occasionally be getting the wrong information.
Rough day for most of the 3D Printing sector.
SGLB looking strong though. -:)
Funny mistake. Somebody messed up. :)
Regardless, an "oral deal" isn't worth much. Neither is a "handshake deal". Haha!
Everyone is free to have an opinion. It seems yours does not align with Merrit's or those who follow the IP sector.
Good luck.
That would be like saying a marathon athlete is no longer a runner because he or she decided to go cross country skiing one weekend.
IDCC is a pioneer in its field. And it always has been.
Those seem like reasonable expectations to me, crtdude. At least if things play out well early in the litigation.
Like most of these similar plays, the trick will be to identify the true valuation and to realize profits before the market catches on. At some point after a big run up, there could be a massive dump. I, for one, do not plan to be holding the bag at that time.
For those wanting to read the complaint...
The PDF document of the Google lawsuit can be found here: Visual Real Estate, Inc. vs. Google Inc. (PDF file)
Well, yes. That is why we are here. This is a company using the CLGL shell to emerge as a new publicly traded intellectual property company.
While there are potentially hundreds of millions to be gained should the company hit a home run against Google, I would caution people from thinking they could win "billions upon billions". There simply are not multiple billion dollar court awards. Realistic expectations are important and I hate to break the news, but the largest surviving patent victories are close to one billion U.S. dollars, but not much more. And those are very rare and the majority have been overturned by higher courts down the line (i.e. the massive awards did not survive) and involved patent infringement on a much larger scale & included the full period of capturing past infringement (6 years).
For starters, with CLGL vs GOOG we are not talking about six years (the maximum allowed by law) of past infringement. The actual complaint alleges infringement since 2011. So it's less than three years. In addition, we do not know the royalty base. Google's Street View and Google Earth products contribute how much revenue? Anybody? Exactly. Google makes 95% of its revenues through advertising. How much can be apportioned to the infringing products and services? Certainly not a majority of revenues.
Now, obviously, the royalty base will be significant - whatever it is. We will just have to wait until the case proceeds to get more information. And then we can hopefully ascertain what potential royalty rate we are looking at. 2% ? 3% ? 5% or more? Again, nobody knows until expert testimony is proffered and we see what the plaintiffs (Visual Real Estate... aka CLGL) are asking for. One nice thing is that VRE has asserted willful infringement against Google. While this doesn't mean that treble damages are guaranteed (triple damages are a very rare outcome in patent infringement judgements), it does increase the potential opportunity and creates additional pressure on GOOG to settle at some point -- especially if the case is not going well for them. But that is getting way, way, way ahead of ourselves.
My first buys were at .03 and my current plan is to let this thing play out while I patiently acquire over the next several weeks. That means adding in tranches as this thing blows in the wind. Most likely I will be buying somewhere in the .02s later this week.
Where we are now is in the early stages of a reverse merger. I have a spec position here because I have historically enjoyed the great rewards of investing very early in pre-revenue patent litigation plays. The market (mainly retail investors and swing traders) is very slow at understanding the fundamentals of these companies, the realistic opportunities that exist, and the true capital structures of reverse merger plays. The tendency is almost always to overstate the potential and to understate the true number of shares that exist on a fully diluted basis. This tends to accelerate valuations and leads to frenetic buying as certain legal events transpire.
Also, I appreciate the individuals backing CLGL. They have a history of success in the IP sector. One of the names associated with MV Portfolios, Inc is Barry Honig. I consider this man to be a rock star when it comes to investing in early stage patent companies. You can see all the involved parties here: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1363573/000135448814001116/clgl_prer14a.htm
We are very early in this one. Shares will be volatile and trading will be very thin at times leading to terrible price spreads and trouble filling orders. This could go significantly lower before the dust settles. It could also skyrocket in the near future. I do not have a crystal ball and think that it is virtually impossible to guess which way the wind blows in the near future and how strong that wind is... but I think down the line this will return multiples on our early investments. There is a great law firm backing VRE in this litigation (DLA Piper) and Honig knows how to pick winners.
Good luck to all playing this one.
You have it backwards. Most NPEs purchase patents. Most NPEs don't invent anything.
IDCC is one of the rare non-academic NPEs that actually has engineers and scientist that create its own intellectual property.
As dndodd already stated, many many many many times IDCC has discussed purchasing intellectual property that will cover areas of wireless and networking technology outside its core R&D related to connectivity, air interface, modem, etc.
Hard to value pre-revenue PIPCOs that are at the early stages of their monetization campaigns.
The reality of SPEX, which I have commented on multiple times previously, is that the market did not understand the capital structure of the company due to the complex nature of the merger with North South.
When it was between $8 and $10 back in Sept., I wrote this was not the price range for long-term buy & hold investors to get in. I also wrote there would be a lot of selling and that the stock would be heavily shorted. The market cap at that time ($170 mm) was very lofty for a patent assertion company with no revenues and lack of clarity in its revenue opportunities.
Keep in mind the financial portals still misrepresent the number of shares outstanding. So expect volatility as the story is still widely misunderstood.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91919311
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=92057383
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=92057875
I'm not sure why this discussion is even ongoing regarding SEPs as it doesn't make any sense. All of the essential patents are from Nokia, who still has ownership rights as per the terms of the patent purchase agreement.
This portfolio is not going to be sold nor will it be broken up with individual SEPs to be sold off. Read the terms of the patent purchase agreement and you will see the provisions that make this highly unattractive option (Nokia's retained ownership rights, impairment clauses, etc.)
Also, VRNG is actively enforcing their SEPs against ZTE as well as other companies. This includes litigation across the world in several jurisdictions. You don't sell patents you are actively asserting in multiple actions. You don't sell patents that are in negotiation. And you don't sell patents that you don't own 100% and that would cost you in heavily in penalties if you did so.
GBR:
In researching the domain name (innovation-partners.com) I see it was registered at least as early as 2001 and has changed hands multiple times. It dropped (i.e., expired) a few years back and was re-registered by a Chinese individual who is active in reselling domains. From what I have researched, this person registers/owns hundreds of domain names and lists them for sale on various sales platforms.
It was reported that the domain innovation-partners.com was sold on Dec. 22, 2013 on a popular aftermarket website for domain sales named Afternic.com. The sales price was $1,059. (Link to sales report)
Now, via archive.org's wayback machine we can see that the first archived snapshot was recorded on Jan 7, 2014. So that means the website went live sometime near the end of last year or at the beginning of 2014, at the latest.
IDCC and/or whoever is in charge of this domain really should update the contact info for the domain. They paid over $1K for it three months ago but it still shows as being owned by the previous owner. That could be problematic if the seller wants to be a jerk.
DDD appoints IP Navigation Group as its strategic patent advisor
Mar 17, 2014
Los Angeles, CA - DDD Group plc (AIM: DDD; OTCQX: DDDGY), the advanced imaging and 3D solutions company, has appointed IP Navigation Group (IPNav) as its strategic patent advisor.
Following two decades of research and development in the field of stereoscopic 3D and advanced imaging, DDD has created an extensive international patent library. Many of these patents have formed the basis for technologies that have been shipped with over 38 million 3D consumer products since 2010 including televisions, PCs and smartphones, firmly establishing the value of these innovative concepts and inventions.
The appointment is the result of DDD's extensive search for an established partner that can assist DDD's in evaluating strategic options for DDD's extensive patent rights. DDD and IPNav will closely collaborate to develop a focused patent licensing program.
Chris Yewdall, CEO of DDD, said:
"DDD has invested heavily over the past twenty years to invent innovative 3D products and solutions that have been used by leading brand name licensees in tens of millions of 3D products, confirming the relevance of these inventions. We believe that IPNav brings a depth of experience, worldwide coverage and flexible approach that we did not see with other intellectual property advisors."
Erich Spangenberg, CEO of IPNav said:
"DDD's 3D conversion and rendering technology patents and related intellectual property are well established in the 3D market globally. This appointment will allow IPNav to assist DDD in its ongoing efforts to achieve fair value for its significant investments in research and development."
About DDD
DDD transforms the visual experience. Its advanced imaging and TriDef- solutions are licensed by leading brands including Samsung, LG and Lenovo for use in TVs, tablets and PCs. Over 38 million 3D products have been shipped by DDD's licensees worldwide. DDD's Yabazam streaming service delivers 3D to smart TVs and tablets everywhere. DDD's shares are quoted on the London Stock Exchange's AIM Market (AIM: DDD) and the OTCQX (DDDGY). For more information please visit www.DDD.com.
About IPNav
Established in 2003, IPNav is the world's leading full-service patent monetization firm, helping forward-thinking corporations, universities, organizations and individuals profit from innovation. IPNav's integrated, end-to-end solution turns idle IP assets into revenue streams. Using its proprietary Patent Monetization Platform, IPNav unlocks the value trapped in our clients' IP portfolios - with timetables and objectives set by the client.
I am back in SPEX for a minor stake as of this morning. It has lost nearly half its value since the start of the year, so I am hoping this a good re-entry and the selling is done for now.
<< #12 - Vitualagility case versus Salesforce.com's April Markman is temporarily stayed but a decision on this stay is expected soon >>
The exact words from the presentation were:
"...the case is temporarily stayed pending some discussions about a re-examination process that is going on, but currently the judge in Texas has affirmed that he wants/thinks this should go to trial. And that trial date would be in December of this year."
Based on the news we have received earlier this month:
http://docketreport.blogspot.com/2014/03/no-stay-pending-interlocutory-appeal-of.html
and
http://www.patentspostgrant.com/lang/en/2014/03/is-the-eastern-district-of-texas-fighting-the-america-invents-act
...where the 2nd motion for the defendants to stay the case in EDTX was denied (again), I am having trouble reconciling Peter's words regarding "temporarily stayed". Perhaps he is referring to the ongoing PTAB IPR process? Perhaps he chose his words wrong and meant something a little less colorful? Or perhaps there is another key piece of info that we haven't seen?
The VA case doesn't look like it was stayed to me.
"Royalty bearing" could mean (1) ongoing royalties, or it could mean (2) a fully-paid up license via a one time upfront payment. (Or it could be one of many simple or very complex hybrid variations of the two.)
Until we see something in a filing or communicated to shareholders elsehwere, we have no idea how any deal was structured. And just to reiterate, we don't know for sure these licenses are royalty bearing -- it's just an educated guess.
Baidu is considered the Chinese version of Google.
ZTE has a market cap of approx $7 billion (USD). They are a telecom company.
Baidu (BIDU) has a market cap of over $57 billion (USD) and has a similar business model as Google. Baidu has been referred to as the "Chinese Google" for many years now.
ZTE is closer to an ALU or a NOK in terms of comparison. ZTE's core products and services all relate to telecommunications and it is an OEM. Google makes the lion's share of its money from advertising. Not really a close comparison to ZTE at all.
Extremely interesting relationship.
We know from the 8K that MARA has licensed certain patents to RPX. We know that RPX is a defensive patent aggregator who will not be developing and products or administering any services that specifically intersect these patents.
Without additional information, one might make an educated guess that this license contains certain provisions where MARA has granted RPX the right to sub-license and/or pass through certain intellectual property rights to some of its customers. If this is true, it seems logical that those companies who are already litigation targets of MARA would not be allowed any indemnification through this RPX license.
Like all patent licenses, the provisions relating to indemnity issues can be quite complex. So even if the above speculation turns out to be true, there is no way to know that particulars of the agreement without MARA disclosing them.
Like those who have posted already, I am confident the RPX agreements are beneficial to the company and will be royalty bearing.
CLGL files lawsuit against Google (GOOG)
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/visual-real-estate-inc-files-130000944.html
Visual Real Estate, Inc. Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Google Inc.
JACKSONVILLE, FL--(Marketwired - Mar 17, 2014) - Visual Real Estate, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of California Gold Corp. (OTCQB: CLGL) and company founded by Jacksonville inventor and entrepreneur William Meadow, today announced that it has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Google Inc. in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The lawsuit claims infringement of three of Visual Real Estate's patents: U.S. Patent number 7,389,181, entitled "Apparatus and Method for Producing Video Drive-By Data Corresponding to a Geographic Location"; U.S. Patent number 7,929,800, entitled "Methods and Apparatus for Generating a Continuum of Image Data"; and U.S. Patent number 8,078,396, entitled "Methods for and Apparatus for Generating a Continuum of Three Dimensional Image Data." Among other things, the complaint identifies Google Street View and Google Earth as infringing Visual Real Estate's patents. The case number is 3:14-cv-00274-TJC-PDB.
"We believe our patented technologies are some of the driving forces behind the demand for street-level imagery and online mapping," said William Meadow, founder and CEO of Visual Real Estate. "Our inventions have made it faster, easier and less expensive to obtain street-level images with integrated location data, which has been a boon to many industries, including real estate, marketing, insurance, property development, tourism and recreation."
Visual Real Estate is represented in the lawsuit by several San Diego and Tampa-based lawyers from DLA Piper, the world's largest multi-national law firm.
I'm in CLGL as of early this AM.
Looking for a fun ride.
You are asking the right questions. This is exactly the discussion that should be taking place for those that want to try and evaluate WDDD's chances going forward. (Those that just want to trade the bubbles up and down need not worry about the priority chain defect).
My thoughts are that it's not exactly a black & white issue. The judge ordered both ATVI and WDDD to meet and discuss which direction this case should take. Should the parties keep going with this lawsuit? Should they dismiss this case in anticipation of a new complaint from Worlds? Or possibly should they just settle and resolve the dispute entirely?
Obviously, what they decide is going to form the basis of our timeline estimates going forward. A new case will take additional time. And Casper's decision already adds an obvious point of appeal for either (or both) party(ies) should any judgement be issued in this case or a future case (if this one is dismissed).
Until someone rules otherwise, it looks like WDDD is fine going forward between 9/13 and patent expiration. But this does add another element of concern, especially at the appellate level. With these ultra micro-cap IP stocks, delays and uncertainty can have a real impact on the PPS. It will be very interesting to see the joint statement that WDDD and ATVI submit to Casper. There is obviously a very good chance that they won't be in agreement and we will have to wait for Casper to make a future decision on the fate of this specific case.
<< anyone have an account to see this ? >>
You can get access with a free trial account.
As for case activity, just use PACER or follow on a free site such as justia.com or the archive.org case links.
As for law360, here's what it is on your page....
____________________________________________________________________
Document Security Systems, Inc - Case Activity (58)
Response | Filed: March 13, 2014 | Entered: March 13, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Response in Opposition to Motion
RESPONSE in Opposition re 89 SEALED MOTION Document Security Systems, Inc.'s Memorandum in Opposition to Coupons.com Incorporated's Motion for Summary Judgment (Redacted Public Version) filed by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Response to Statement of Undisputed Facts, # 2 Declaration of Joseph Culig, # 3 Exhibit 1 - Agreement, # 4 Exhibit 2 - Filed Under Seal, # 5 Exhibit 3 - Deposition Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit 4 - Excerpts from Deposition Transcript, # 7 Exhibit 5-23 - Filed Under Seal, # 8 Exhibit 24 - Deposition Exhibit, # 9 Exhibit 25-31 - Filed Under Seal, # 10 Exhibit 32 - Deposition Exhibit, # 11 Exhibit 33 - Deposition Exhibit, # 12 Exhibit 34 - Filed Under Seal, # 13 Exhibit 35 - Filed Under Seal, # 14 Exhibit 36 - Filed Under Seal)(Culig, Joseph)
Motion | Filed: March 13, 2014 | Entered: March 13, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Seal
Amended MOTION to Seal Documents in Relation to its Opposition to Coupons.com Incorporated's Motion for Summary Judgment by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Joseph Culig, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Culig, Joseph)
Motion | Filed: March 13, 2014 | Entered: March 13, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Seal
MOTION to Seal Documents in Relation to its Opposition to Coupons.com Incorporated's Motion for Summary Judgment by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Joseph Culig, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Culig, Joseph)
Motion | Filed: March 4, 2014 | Entered: March 11, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Sealed Motion
SEALED MOTION by Coupons.com Incorporated.(BK)
Motion | Filed: February 13, 2014 | Entered: February 13, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Seal Document
MOTION to Seal Document [Motion to Seal Motion for Summary Judgment and Supporting Papers] by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Goteiner, Neil)
Order | Filed: January 15, 2014 | Entered: January 15, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
LETTER ORDER (Counsel are directed to attempt to schedule the deposition on 1/28/2014, or alternatively, 1/27/2014 or 1/29/2014. Counsel are further directed to advise this Court by 2:00 PM EST today whether their efforts have been successful.) Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 1/15/2014. (KAH)
Response | Filed: January 14, 2014 | Entered: January 14, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Response in Opposition to Motion
RESPONSE in Opposition re 79 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery DSS Motion for a Limited Extension of Expert Discovery with respect to DSS' Damages Expert Mark kGleason filed by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Goteiner, Neil)
Motion | Filed: January 13, 2014 | Entered: January 13, 2014 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Extension of Time to Complete Discovery
MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery DSS Motion for a Limited Extension of Expert Discovery with respect to DSS' Damages Expert Mark kGleason by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Declaration, # 2 Exhibit B - Email, # 3 Exhibit C - Email, # 4 Exhibit D - Agreement)(Mahalek, David)
Order | Filed: December 27, 2013 | Entered: December 27, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Scheduling Order
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER (Please Note: This docket text may not contain the entire contents of the attached Order. It is your responsibility to read the attached Order and download it for future reference. Direct any questions to the Chambers of the Judge who entered this Order.) Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 12/31/2013. Expert Discovery to be completed by 1/24/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 2/14/2014. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 12/27/2013. (KAH)
Order | Filed: October 3, 2013 | Entered: October 7, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Scheduling Order
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER (Please Note: This docket text may not contain the entire contents of the attached Order. It is your responsibility to read the attached Order and download it for future reference. Direct any questions to the Chambers of the Judge who entered this Order.) Fact Discovery to be completed by 10/18/2013. Expert ID for party with burden of proof due by 11/18/2013. Expert Rebuttal Reports due by 12/16/2013. Expert Discovery to be completed by 1/10/2014. All other deadlines contained in the Court's 8/19/2013 Amended Scheduling Order 75 shall remain in full force and effect. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 10/3/2013. (KAH)
Order | Filed: August 19, 2013 | Entered: August 19, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Scheduling Order
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER (Please Note: This docket text may not contain the entire contents of the attached Order. It is your responsibility to read the attached Order and download it for future reference. Direct any questions to the Chambers of the Judge who entered this Order.) Fact Discovery to be completed by 10/4/2013. Expert ID for party with burden of proof due by 11/8/2013. Expert Rebuttal Reports due by 12/6/2013. Expert Discovery to be completed by 1/10/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 1/31/2014. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 8/19/2013. (KAH)
Order | Filed: August 6, 2013 | Entered: August 6, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
CONSENT ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT. Signed by Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman on 8/6/13. (JHF)
Order | Filed: July 26, 2013 | Entered: July 26, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
LETTER ORDER staying the proceedings until July 30, 2013. Signed by Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman on 7/26/2013. (RJO)
Motion | Filed: June 26, 2013 | Entered: June 26, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Summary Judgment
MOTION for Summary Judgment by European Central Bank. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Statement of Undisputed Facts, # 4 Appendix, # 5 Affidavit of Joshua A. Davis, # 6 Exhibit A, # 7 Exhibit B)(Davis, Joshua)
Answer | Filed: May 23, 2013 | Entered: May 23, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Answer to Complaint
ANSWER to Complaint [Answer to Amended Complaint] by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Goteiner, Neil)
Order | Filed: May 15, 2013 | Entered: May 15, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set Hearings
ORDER Scheduling Conference set for 6/12/2002 at 11:30 AM before Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman. Signed by Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman on 5/15/2013. (RJO)
Order | Filed: May 9, 2013 | Entered: May 9, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
DECISION AND ORDER granting 30 Motion to Dismiss the second cause of action in the Amended Complaint. The action may proceed as to the first cause of action for breach of contract.. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 5/9/13. (KAP)
Order | Filed: May 7, 2013 | Entered: May 7, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 53 Motion ; granting 24 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 5/6/2013. (BK)
Motion | Filed: April 30, 2013 | Entered: April 30, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Withdraw
MOTION to Withdraw 31 MOTION for Reconsideration re 28 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, Order on Motion to Strike,,,,,,,, Notice of Withdrawal of Motion by Document Security Systems, Inc..(Haller, Timothy)
Order | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 17, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 62 Motion for Joseph A. Culig to appear Pro Hac Vice. The admission fee has been paid to the Clerk of the Court. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/16/13. (CAM)
Order | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 17, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 59 Motion for Christopher J. Lee to appear Pro Hac Vice. The admission fee has been paid to the Clerk of the Court. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/16/13. (CAM)
Order | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 17, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 60 Motion for David J. Mahalek to appear Pro Hac Vice. The admission fee has been paid to the Clerk of the Court. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/16/13. (CAM)
Order | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 17, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 61 Motion for Robert A. Conley to appear Pro Hac Vice. The admission fee has been paid to the Clerk of the Court. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/16/13. (CAM)
Motion | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 16, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 0209-1784941.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Sponsoring, # 2 Affidavit Culig Affidavit, # 3 Exhibit Attorney Oath, # 4 Appendix Civility Oath, # 5 Exhibit Database Info, # 6 Exhibit Registration Info, # 7 Exhibit Cert Good Standing)(Haller, Timothy)
Motion | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 16, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 0209-1784928.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Sponsoring, # 2 Affidavit Mahalek Affidavit, # 3 Exhibit Attorney Oath, # 4 Appendix Civility Oath, # 5 Exhibit Database Info, # 6 Exhibit ECF Registration, # 7 Exhibit Cert Good Standing)(Haller, Timothy)
Motion | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 16, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 0209-1784932.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit sponsoring, # 2 Affidavit Conley affidavit, # 3 Exhibit Attorney Oath, # 4 Appendix Civility Oath, # 5 Exhibit Database Info, # 6 Exhibit ECF Registration, # 7 Exhibit Cert Good Standing)(Haller, Timothy)
Motion | Filed: April 16, 2013 | Entered: April 16, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 0209-1784912.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Sponsoring, # 2 Affidavit Lee Afffidavit, # 3 Exhibit Attorney Oath Lee, # 4 Appendix Civility Oath Lee, # 5 Exhibit Database Info Lee, # 6 Exhibit ECF Registration Lee, # 7 Exhibit Cert Good Standing Lee)(Haller, Timothy)
Motion | Filed: April 15, 2013 | Entered: April 15, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order for Admission PHV, # 2 Affidavit Sponsoring Affidavit Lee, # 3 Affidavit Lee Affidavit, # 4 Exhibit Attorney Oath Lee, # 5 Appendix Civility Oath Lee, # 6 Exhibit Database Info Lee, # 7 Exhibit ECF Registration Lee, # 8 Exhibit Cert Good Standing, # 9 Affidavit Sponsoring Affidavit Mahalek, # 10 Affidavit Mahalek Affidavit, # 11 Exhibit Attorney Oath Mahalek, # 12 Appendix Civility Oath Mahalek, # 13 Exhibit Database Info Mahalek, # 14 Exhibit ECF Registration Mahalek, # 15 Exhibit Cert Good Standing Mahalek, # 16 Affidavit Sponsoring Affidavit Conley, # 17 Affidavit Conley Affidavit, # 18 Exhibit Attorney Oath Conley, # 19 Appendix Civility Oath Conley, # 20 Exhibit Database Info Conley, # 21 Exhibit ECF Registration Conley, # 22 Exhibit Cert Good Standing Conley, # 23 Affidavit Sponsoring Affidavit Culig, # 24 Affidavit Culig Affidavit, # 25 Exhibit Attorney Oath Culig, # 26 Appendix Civility Oath Culig, # 27 Exhibit Database Info Culig, #
Order | Filed: April 10, 2013 | Entered: April 10, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Hon. Jonathan W. Feldman. Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 4/10/13. (JMC)
Answer | Filed: April 9, 2013 | Entered: April 9, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
Contract: Other | New York Western
Answer to Complaint
ANSWER to Complaint by Document Security Systems, Inc..(Whiting, Reid)
Order | Filed: March 5, 2013 | Entered: March 5, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Protective Order
STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER granting 54 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 3/5/2013. (KAH)
Motion | Filed: February 28, 2013 | Entered: February 28, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Protective Order
Joint MOTION for Protective Order by Coupons.com Incorporated, Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Stipulation and Protective Order)(Kunze, Jason)
Complaint | Filed: February 4, 2013 | Entered: February 4, 2013 European Central Bank v. Document Security Systems, Inc.
190(Contract: Other) | New York Western
Complaint
COMPLAINT against Document Security Systems, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0209-1740896.), filed by European Central Bank. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons, # 3 A - Award (Apr. 29, 2011) (German), # 4 B - Award (Apr. 29, 2011) (English translation), # 5 C - Award (Sept. 19, 2011) (German), # 6 D - Award (Sept. 19, 2011) (English translation))(Davis, Joshua) (Entered: 02/04/2013)
Motion | Filed: January 31, 2013 | Entered: January 31, 2013 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Miscellaneous Relief
Joint MOTION Extension of mediation deadlines by Document Security Systems, Inc..(Kunze, Jason)
Order | Filed: December 12, 2012 | Entered: December 12, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Scheduling Order
SCHEDULING ORDER (Please Note: This docket text may not contain the entire contents of the attached Order. It is your responsibility to read the attached Order and download it for future reference. Direct any questions to the Chambers of the Judge who entered this Order.) Status Conference set for 8/13/2013 11:20 AM before Hon. Marian W. Payson. Mandatory Disclosures due by 1/25/2013. Motions to Join Parties/Amend Pleadings due by 6/3/2013. Fact Discovery to be completed by 8/30/2013. Expert ID for party with burden of proof due by 10/11/2013. Expert Rebuttal Reports due by 11/8/2013. Expert Discovery to be completed by 12/13/2013. Dispositive Motions due by 1/31/2014. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 12/12/2012. (KAH)
Order | Filed: November 30, 2012 | Entered: November 30, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings
AMENDED MOTION SCHEDULING ORDER re 31 MOTION for Reconsideration re 28 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, Order on Motion to Strike,,,,,,,, filed by Document Security Systems, Inc., ( Motion Hearing set for 5/2/2013 03:00 PM before Hon. Charles J. Siragusa.). Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 11/30/12. (KAP)
Order | Filed: November 19, 2012 | Entered: November 21, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
AMENDED ADR REFERRAL ORDER. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 11/19/2012. (BK)
Order | Filed: November 20, 2012 | Entered: November 20, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE re 30 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM [Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Count Two of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6)] filed by Coupons.com Incorporated, 31 MOTION for Reconsideration re 28 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, Order on Motion to Strike,,,,,,,, filed by Document Security Systems, Inc.. Defendant Coupons.com's reply paapers in further support of Motion to Dimiss are due 11/16/12. Plaintiff Document Security Systems Inc.'s reply papers in further support of motion for reconsideration are due 11/16/12. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 11/20/12. (KAP)
Order | Filed: October 23, 2012 | Entered: October 25, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion for Pro Hac Vice
ORDER granting 39 Motion for Jason T. Kunze to appear Pro Hac Vice. Such admission shall be effective upon the payment of the admission fee to the Clerk of the Court. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 10/23/12. (CAM)
Motion | Filed: October 16, 2012 | Entered: October 16, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice Notice of Motion For Admission of Counsel Pro Hac Vice - Jason T. Kunze by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Robinson, Terence)
Motion | Filed: October 15, 2012 | Entered: October 15, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice by Jason T. Kunze ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 0209-1678388.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Sponsor Affidavit, # 2 Pro Bono Form, # 3 Attorney's Oath, # 4 Attorney Database, # 5 Civility Principles Oath)(Robinson, Terence)
Order | Filed: October 9, 2012 | Entered: October 9, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set Hearings
ORDER (Scheduling Conference set for 11/1/2012 11:00 AM before Hon. Marian W. Payson.) Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 10/9/2012. (KAH)
Order | Filed: October 3, 2012 | Entered: October 3, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order
ORDER extending time that the Mediation session must be complete. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 9/30/2012. (BK)
Order | Filed: October 2, 2012 | Entered: October 2, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge
TEXT ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Hon. Marian W. Payson. The Magistrate Judge is hereby designated to act in this case as follows: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), all pre-trial matters in this case are referred to the above-named United States Magistrate Judge, including but not limited to: (1) conduct of a scheduling conference and entry of a scheduling order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, (2) hearing and disposition of all non-dispositive motions or applications, (3) supervision of discovery, and (4) supervision of all procedural matters involving the aforementioned or involving the preparation of the case or any matter therein for consideration by the District Judge. All non-dispositive motions or applications shall be filed with the Clerk and made returnable before the Magistrate Judge. The parties are encouraged to consider the provisions of 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) governing consent to either partial or complete disposition of the case, including trial if necessary, by the Magistrate Judge. Consent forms are available from the office of the Magistrate Judge or the office of the Clerk of Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 10/2/12. (KJA)
Order | Filed: October 1, 2012 | Entered: October 1, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings
MOTION SCHEDULING ORDER re 30 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM and 31 MOTION for Reconsideration. ( Responses due by 10/26/2012., Replies due by 11/8/2012. Oral Argument set for 6/13/2013 03:00 PM before Hon. Charles J. Siragusa.). Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 10/1/12. (KAP)
Motion | Filed: September 12, 2012 | Entered: September 12, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Reconsideration
MOTION for Reconsideration re 28 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, Order on Motion to Strike,,,,,,,, by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Certificate of Service)(Holland, Colleen)
Motion | Filed: September 10, 2012 | Entered: September 10, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM [Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Count Two of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(B)(6)] by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Appendix, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Goteiner, Neil)
Order | Filed: August 19, 2012 | Entered: August 20, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Order on Motion to Strike
DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 8 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 23 Motion to Strike 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM re: Plaintiff's Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 14 MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint, 23 MOTION to Strike Argument Section IA of Plaintiff's Reply in Further Support of its Motion for Leave to Amend Pursuant to Local Rule 7(a)(6) MOTION to Strike Argument Section IA of Plaintiff's Reply in Further Support of its Motion for Leave to Amend Pursuant to Local Rule 7(a)(6). The Amended Complaint [#14-3] is now the operative pleading, although its third and fourth causes of action are stricken for the reasons discussed herein. Presently, there are two claims in the action: breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets. Defendant is ordered to answer or otherwise move against the Amended Complaint within twenty (20) days of the date of this Decision and Order, unless the parties stipulate otherwise.. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 8/20/12. (KAP)
Order | Filed: August 13, 2012 | Entered: August 14, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order Referring Case to Mediation
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Mediation. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 8/13/2012. (BK)
Motion | Filed: August 2, 2012 | Entered: August 3, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Appear Pro Hac Vice
MOTION to appear pro hac vice by Mark D. Robins ( Filing fee $ 75 receipt number 0209-1638332.) by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Holland Declaration, # 2 Affidavit Robins Declaration, # 3 Exhibit Robins Attorney Oath, # 4 Exhibit Robins Civility Principles Oath, # 5 Exhibit CM/ECF Registration, # 6 Exhibit Attorney Database Information, # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Holland, Colleen)
Motion | Filed: July 31, 2012 | Entered: August 1, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Strike
MOTION to Strike Argument Section IA of Plaintiff's Reply in Further Support of its Motion for Leave to Amend Pursuant to Local Rule 7(a)(6) by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Appendix Unreported Authorities)(Goteiner, Neil)
Order | Filed: June 28, 2012 | Entered: June 29, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings
AMENDED MOTION SCHEDULING ORDER re 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM re: Plaintiff's Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) filed by Coupons.com Incorporated, ( Motion Hearing set for 8/16/2012 03:30 PM before Hon. Charles J. Siragusa.). Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 6/26/12. (KAP)
Order | Filed: March 1, 2012 | Entered: March 1, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Stipulation and Order ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings
STIPULATION AND ORDER re Motion to amend complaint( Responses due by 3/9/2012., Replies due by 3/30/2012.). Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 2/27/12. (KAP)
Motion | Filed: February 10, 2012 | Entered: February 10, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Amend/Correct
MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Richard Rochford, # 2 Exhibit Ex. A to Rochford Declaration, # 3 Exhibit Ex. B to Rochford Declaration, # 4 Exhibit Ex. C to Rochford Declaration)(Rochford, Richard)
Order | Filed: January 5, 2012 | Entered: January 5, 2012 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Set/Reset Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings
MOTION SCHEDULING ORDER re 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM re: Plaintiff's Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) filed by Coupons.com Incorporated, ( Responses due by 2/10/2012., Replies due by 3/9/2012. Motion Hearing set for 10/4/2012 03:00 PM before Hon. Charles J. Siragusa.). Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 1/3/12. (KAP)
Motion | Filed: December 5, 2011 | Entered: December 5, 2011 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM re: Plaintiff's Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) by Coupons.com Incorporated. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Goteiner, Neil)
Order | Filed: November 18, 2011 | Entered: November 18, 2011 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
Contract: Other | New York Western
Order ~Util - Add and Terminate Attorneys ~Util - Update Answer Due Date
STIPULATION AND ORDER, Attorney Neil A Goteiner for Coupons.com Incorporated added., Answer due date updated as to Coupons.com Incorporated answer due 12/5/2011. Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 11/18/11. (KAP)
Complaint | Filed: October 24, 2011 | Entered: October 24, 2011 Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Coupons.com Incorporated
190(Contract: Other) | New York Western
Complaint
COMPLAINT against Coupons.com Incorporated ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0209-1473760.), filed by Document Security Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rochford, Richard) (Entered: 10/24/2011)
Patent lawyers are wonderful assets to message boards, blogs, and opinion websites when these attorneys can provide facts and logic to helpinvestors understand case law, rules of procedure, timelines, and other issues relating to lawsuits and licensing.
However, patent lawyers often make for terrible patent stock analysts and patent investors because of the tendency to be myopic. Looking at PIPCOs and focusing only on patent law and litigation can be quite detrimental. It is equally important to understand the underlying technology, the patenting licensing sector, and the nuances that exist in the IP world.
Not all patents were created equal. Commercial oftware patents have historically enjoyed higher RRs that telecom patents and other standardized technologies. On the flip side, SEPs provide greater opportunities with the abundance of OEMs, ODMs, and other suppliers of devices and services. These are just two examples of many differing kinds of IP assets that require unique and separate methods of analysis.
I am not a patent attorney, but I have been researching and analyzing patent investments for a few decades now - both personally & professionally. My comments here are not to dissuade or persuade anyone from doing what they believe is best for their money. I only try to cut through the BS and paint a clear picture for all. With clarity, we can make the best decisions and manage risk vs. reward to the best of our abilities and inline with our own personal tolerance levels.
At the risk of repeating myself for the umpteenth time, WDDD is clearly an excellent trading vehicle at the present time. I fail to understand why anyone gets defensive regarding my comments.
I've never known a CEO to be "disappointed" over a development that was positive.
dis·ap·point·ment
(noun: disappointment)
1. the feeling of sadness or displeasure caused by the nonfulfillment of one's hopes or expectations.
Here's what the CEO had to say on Thursday in an interview after the MSJ ruling :
"Clearly we're disappointed, but it's not the end of the case," Worlds CEO Thom Kidrin said Thursday. "The judge has not thrown out the case or invalidated the patents entirely."
PPS has appreciated since the ruling and PR.
I'm not "trying" to do anything but present the facts of this specific case and explain certain concepts of patent law.