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.
THANK YOU!
Good. Glad to hear it....
Your $190 stock has plenty of money to pay out in royalties to companies whose IP they infringe....
Looks like a few folks from the Apple board have migrated over....worried are we?
I think that Apple, AT&T,and Verizon have already expended a great deal of time and energy trying to shoot down VPLM's patents...
So far they have come up with NADA....
Why don't you send your "several other patents" and related IP along to them, you might be their savior....
Anyone with expertise in patent law will tell you that the PTAB's decision in November 2017 was a resounding win for Voip Pal.
Other opinions don't matter.
https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/ptab-filings%2FIPR2016-01201%2F53
Here it is, all 29 pages, and extremely detailed, and technical. A complete rejection of Apple's position, based on scientific, technical evaluation.
So, were you referring to the above document when you made the following comment?
The panel of judges took evidence and depositions, and deliberated, the entire process taking 18 months. They ruled 100% in favor of Voip Pal. Those are the FACTS
I found this post extremely helpful
I've read the patents. You should read the latest ones, recently granted. Good bedtime reading
nyt -your statement is CLEAR. You are stating that the IPR sweep's greatness is DEFINED by a quick sale - YOUR words, not mine.
The IPR decision by the PTAB had an EXTENSIVE technical explanation of their rationale for denying Apple's position and re-affirming Voip -Pal's. I can post excerpts if needed just so everyone knows we are all speaking of the same document.
Not true. The IPR sweep is an important step toward a sale. The infringers know that there are appeals still available, and the Federal Circuit is another step. So anyone expecting the IPR sweep to = an immediate sale would be unrealistic. HOWEVER, winning the IPR is a VERY important step as the cases go to trial, where damages become liabilities on balance sheets etc...
The IPR victory from November is great in my opinion.
Your statement IS a deniable "fact".
I emphatically agree
When? Link?
When did they make this statement?
The issue that I was referring to was the Apple petition for sanctions to be decided by PTAB, which is as of yet, pending and unresolved.
Stays and sanctions are 2 completely different subjects, and I understand the difference VERY well.
I NEVER suggested the sanction issue had been resolved.
I continue to believe in the quality of our IP, and our legal team.
I wish everyone a nice weekend
VERY SIMPLY
The point of my post was that given the intense focus on the PTAB/Apple/Sanctions issue, that Apple was not the ONLY case we were pursuing, and that for all we knew the other cases were moving along....
Based on the PR, the other cases ARE moving along, and hopefully, soon, the Apple case will as well. I'm pleased to see that the cases ARE in fact moving along, even while the Apple case is stayed. Clearly, many other shareholders are, as well.
A good week for Voip Pal shareholders and those who believe in the IP that we own.
never mind....It was my impression that only the Apple case was stayed, and that the others were moving along. The press release of a couple of days ago, only confirms my impression.
What "bad news" - post a link, please.
and you know this, HOW?
If you are referring to news regarding the PTAB making a decision on the Apple motion for sanctions, it hasn't happened yet.
Not a guarantee of any outcome, of course, but I found this article to be interesting reading
https://www.ptabwatch.com/2016/12/guidance-on-requesting-motions-for-sanctions/
"Based on the decisions identified above, the Board appears hesitant to authorize motions for sanctions and when it does authorize such a motion, the motions typically have been denied. Timeliness of the request for leave to move for sanctions is a major factor; and therefore, it is very important to contact the Board immediately after the alleged misconduct occurs. Moreover, the Board is more likely to grant sanctions if the activity clearly violated instructions from the Board, or if a pattern of bad behavior occurs after a warning. The panel advised it is unlikely the Board will impose sanctions and it is important not to rely sole on this potential remedy."
ATT, Verizon, Twitter have no stay on them, correct? So those cases are moving forward.
While we are all waiting on the PTAB's ruling on sanctions, let us not forget that the amount of time
they are taking is NOT "out of line" with their record of ruling on such things.
This is a long game played by Silicon Valley, and patience IS required.
Most companies have different attorneys.
Litigation
Patent Prosecution
IP Development
each has a specialty...
I don't disagree - however, IF we can move to Federal Court, and amend the damages, with a WIN at the PTAB, Apple will be staring down at an oncoming train
I agree. By validating both the PTAB IPR process, AND supporting the FINALITY of RENDERED DECISIONS, I think this was positive for us...
Let's get a ruling from the PTAB!
This news was released mid-January, re: the representation by
Mr. Kevin Malek
Voip-Pal.com, Inc. Provides Update on Recent Company Developments
Voip-Pal retains New York IP attorney Kevin Malek to head its litigation efforts
January 16, 2018 -- Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”, “Company”) (OTCQB: VPLM) is pleased to provide an update of its recent activities.
The Company has filed its annual report, Form 10-K with the SEC for the year ending September 30, 2017. The report can be viewed on www.voip-pal.com
Voip-Pal has filed its response to Apple’s motion for sanctions with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The response can be viewed on www.voip-pal.com. A decision from the PTAB is expected in the month of February.
Kevin Malek, Managing Member of New York City law firm, Malek Moss PLLC, has been retained as the Company’s head intellectual property litigator. He gained complex litigation and intellectual property experience working in the New York offices of Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. Mr. Malek is well regarded for his litigation and transactional experience and routinely acts as advisor and counsel to various information technology companies. He has been recognized in various recent editions of Super Lawyers and by Benchmark Litigation as a “Rising Star.” Kevin received his law degree from Fordham University School of Law in New York City and his Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology from the University of California, Los Angeles. He will be working together with the previously retained attorneys from Alverson Taylor Mortenson & Sanders. Knobbe Martens continues to serve as Voip-Pal’s patent agent.
On January 26, 2018, the Company’s legal counsel will make a formal request to the Federal District Court in Nevada to lift the stay of legal proceedings, which was agreed to by the parties pending the outcome of the IPR’s, Once the stay is lifted they will resume litigation vs. Apple, Verizon and AT&T.
Emil Malak, CEO of Voip-Pal, stated, “We are extremely pleased with our reply to Apple’s motion for sanctions. We invite everyone to read the reply and draw their own conclusions.”
?
Mr. Malak also said, “Kevin is an excellent intellectual property litigator and we are fortunate to have him on our team. We look forward to receiving the PTAB’s decision soon, and to resuming our litigation in Nevada.”
FINAL IS FINAL......another aspect to the SCOTUS rulings
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-969_f2qg.pdf
This could be quite important in SUPPORT of the FINALITY of a ruling by the PTAB based upon merit.
My read is this supports Voip Pal.
I agree, from the point of view that by validating the PTAB's existence, the Supreme Court sustained the validity of the re-examination of the patents. Now, we have to wait until the PTAB renders a decision on the application for sanctions by Apple.
Personally, I just don't see how any "reasonable decision" would invalidate 18 months of depositions and cross examination. Therefore, I remain optimistic and share your view that the validation of the PTAB/IPR may very well serve us VERY well as the cases go forward.
I want to dig into this point with some patent people to better understand how this may affect the PTAB's S.O.P.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond further...
you are the one who used the word "JOB" , not me
FACT - Apple challenged the Voip Pal core patents in IPR, and gave their arguments to EXPERTS who ruled in favor of Voip Pal.
Infringement will be decided by a court, if it gets there.
I never said is was Apple's mandate - but you sure twisted my words.
What I will say is that it is COMMON business practice for LARGE companies to, without license, use the technology of SMALL companies, and simply try to crush them using legal tactics. You want to ARGUE that point?
Be my guest..
Apple's job?
Apple's job is to infringe and only pay when forced to. They may know the patents well, that has NOTHING to do with their willingness to infringe and use their legal to impede us.
It's a false narrative based on FACTS
Thousands of patent owners have gone through an extensive examination process, received patents seen their IP used without license, and then gone through interminable litigation, because large companies don't WANT to buy IP (even IP as important as Voip Pal's) because they KNOW that most companies can't afford to endure the legal hardship of IPR etc...
This is EXACTLY why the courts award TREBLE damages for willful infringement.
but you knew all this
It is a false narrative.
Look at VirnetX. How many times must they "win" to collect?
Look at the PTAB's record of cancelling patent claims...
Having a patent is great, but only a step to monetizing that technology.
The big companies play a long game, hoping to break the back of a smaller company by endless legal maneuvering. It's what they do...they don't rush out and buy patents until they feel they must.
You know this - we all know this.
Patience is a virtue
Once the dust settles, the likelihood of further institutions of IPRs by the PTAB will drop dramatically. Panels will have little appetite for a petitioner going after the same patents over and over again - keep in mind that VPLM's new patents are often continuations of 815 & 005.
Just my opinion, of course
Can't top this post.
I'm not sure that there is technically a "last date" , per se, but it seems reasonable to think that we're close to the PTAB making a ruling....