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.
Well put P2P.
And the IPR trials and FADC Sanctions appeal. Details details...
Profound logic. Any facts you care to share that helped form your guess?
Are there facts or DD to back this opinion up? Suggestions like this are pure speculation and just provide more fodder for the negative views & a letdown for any who believe it.
Just more info on what’s happening and the view of the ADR from both VPLM & Apple perspectives. I’ll keep my editorial out of it and let everyone decide what it means to them.
Who cares...if anyone expects this to move big in any direction before there is any further info on the ADR or any FINAL decisions in the courts, then they are just being delusional. Will there be daily churn up and down, yep. That’s the market. It’s amazing how many think every price move is monumental & will make or break VPLM.
Patent plays are a LONG game...if one can’t bear the ups & downs, then they should steer clear of these types of investments.
GLTA!
New docket notice in W TX cases. VPLM requests stay and provides info on ADR in N CA. Also includes counter points by Apple et al.
W TX - Doc 48 Notice
Replies are due by 3/8. It will be interesting to see the docs & understand which side or if both are willing to discuss some sort of ADR.
Agree. If VPLM lost already there’s nothing left to dispute, no?
Missed the entire point. People keep saying VPLM IS DONE...Final nail in coffin, etc.
If that’s true, why “ask if they are willing” to confer in alternate dispute resolution...there would be nothing to resolve if the court already decided VPLM lost, no?
Weird...why is the court forcing the parties to confer on an "alternate dispute resolution" in Northern CA? If the fat lady already sung, there's no reason for forcing further dispute resolution, eh?
N CA Doc 70 - Order Alternative Dispute Resolution
For anyone interested, here's a long but very informative article on Interloculary Appeals. The legal jargon and case citations are tough to follow at some points, but it is worth the time to help understand what VPLM may be up against.
Navigating the Steep and Thorny Route
Funny...I just posted a similar question.
In spite of the recent news, there seems to be strong volume keeping the stock price within the penny range. Seems odd...anyone have insight into what’s keeping the stock propped up?
Nice analogy Rapz. You’re exactly right...a coherent strategy to win is desperately needed. Feels like we’re down by 25 points with 2 minutes left in the game and Emil just wants to take half-court 3 pointers & hope he hits the rim!
I don’t disagree however I don’t feel this Op Ed helps the cause any. If anyone here things the MSM is going to pick up the story by attacking & blaming the left for the judges decisions here, then they haven’t been paying attention to what’s happening out there & are locked in their own echo chamber. Remember, judges are appointed by BOTH parties. I doesn’t bring me much comfort hanging our future hope on a political campaign to “fight political corruption in the courts.”
Glad to see the company is communicating. Sure would have been nice if Emil checked his political ideology & ego at the door and communicated the facts in a political neutral fashion. Drivel like this can alienate a bunch of potential investors. Why does everything have to be a political stance?
Spot on Butter. It’s tough to argue that Hudnell isn’t a top notch IP attorney.
Yep, I’m aware. I have a few posts out there r/pennystocks
Great question. VoIP-Pal only has 1 official website. That doesn’t mean there aren’t other unofficial message boards somewhere. When you find them, let us know.
Wow...can you say slander?
Thanks for the clarification Rapz.
Please clarify...What does the point on Rule 21 refer to? Is it more about speculation as to the timeframe or was there some references to Rule 21 being invoked that we missed?
Enlighten us. What does that mean to an “uneducated” investor?
Apple loses another appeal in Uniloc at CAFC. Womp womp!
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/node/27086
Sec...Boom??? Lol!
How’d that Neveda case go? Did the court finally get the interest payment re-calculated correctly? I bet it’s still a far cry from the millions of shares lost.
And yet, the largest tech companies in the world still can’t rid themselves of VPLM. Now with all the big tech money & legal resources I wonder why they’re still needing to defend themselves against multiple patent infringement claims and never once claimed in any court hearing, before the PTAB or Federal judges, that they are not using VPLM technology at all. I would think that would be the first line of defense if they are truly not infringing. Weird.
Wait...you were gone? Lol! Did you finally escape your Big Tech kidnappers? :-0
Don’t know for sure. No new court records. Maybe the Robin Hood or Reddit Pennystock crowd got wind of VPLM.
Interesting...so Motley Fool taking a position twice in VPLM means nothing, eh?
Also, many of the Wall Street firms don’t usually take positions in penny stocks due to the risk profile...anyone worth their investing chops understands that. Not to mention, most longs here understand the risk and based on their own due diligence, have decided the potential upside return is far greater than the downside risk. That doesn’t mean we can’t be wrong...it means we’re comfortable with our risk assessment and are willing to see the court cases through to a decision. Learned long ago to be cautious of the carnival barkers who profess to have a sure bet or “knows” the outcome of an event. Momma always said, “Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.”
Let’s see where this thing goes once a mandamus decision is made...either VPLM will still be standing & fighting in Waco or they won’t and will have to deal with the biased Koh again in N CA. It’s a simple as that. It’s not that difficult to understand, that is if confirmation bias isn’t getting in the way of common sense.
Which means the patent still won’t be invalidated only specific claims of the patents will be. Which leaves the rest of them to be prosecuted at a later date if desired.
I believe that is correct.
No, they didn’t deem the “patents” ineligible...they deemed a handful of patent claims ineligible.
And don’t forget, when Apple tried to get the patents as a whole invalidated at the PTAB sanctions appeal, a handful of judges smacked Apple down and upheld the remaining independent claims as valid, which means VPLM can still prosecute those patents if they deem it worthwhile.
Hope you’re right.
No way Rapz...Apple is the most honest and upstanding US company. They can NEVER be guilty of ripping off any technology from other companies.
*sarcasm intended*
This couldn’t be further from the truth and only shows that some don’t understand what the patents are for! If VPLM didn’t have any “products” that the Big Techs weren’t using, then all these cases would have been a slam dunk win and dismissed outright for “no standing” when the cases were originally filed. You can’t sue someone for something you don’t have. Unreal.
Agree 100%
Agree on all points. I was responding to Butter’s question on when we think we might hear on the mandamus.
I believe the court accepted the Mandamus as an expedited writ. The case is fully briefed and requests for amicus briefs have been dismissed as moot so hopefully an we’ll see an answer within 2 weeks or less.
Before anyone jumps on the “2 weeks or less”...that is my OPINION & HOPE. I’m not professing to know or saying that’s a concrete timeframe. Only the courts know when we’ll get their decision!
"More information was posted on our other site..."? Not sure I understand.