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.
That's a good find. Do you know what document D.I. 278 is, I would like to read the rest of that quote since it looks like they paraphrased a bit?
Thanks Khenry. The redacted version of these is annoying, it's hard to follow their conversation, but they are whining about discovery and trying to make a case to reopen. Nonsense
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A95ec32ab-8cbf-4b43-bee0-a2a46d6c4831
Assuming no docs yet?
I would not invest, even if accredited, if the company cannot spell discretely correctly. Devil is in the details.
This is a triple negative, forgive me if I am not answering your question, but if there's a settlement you will receive monies if you still own shares at that time.
Can anyone sticky this please?
Only a fool would sell...
"ARRIS failed to show that the panel’s decision misapplies the law or creates any sort of conflict. ARRIS also failed to show that this case is one of exceptional importance. The petition for rehearing en banc should therefore be denied."
Poetry in motion
Thanks Khenry, going to be a busy weekend for them. Me as well, still have not filed my taxes
Wouldn't that also mean lots of selling? Shares coming from somewhere...
Page 13:
2. The terms “Chanbond,” “Plaintiff,” “You,” or “Your” mean Chanbond, LLC, and any and all predecessors, successors, divisions, subsidiaries, or joint ventures thereof, together with any and all parent or affiliated companies or corporations, including at least CBV and ZBand, and all past or present members, shareholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, attorneys, representatives, any past or current investors or persons with an interest in Chanbond, LLC or the Asserted Patents, Related Patents, or Related Applications, including at least UnifiedOnline or Whitaker, and all other persons acting or purporting to act or that have acted or purported to have acted on behalf of any of the foregoing. To resolve any doubt, for purposes of Defendants’ discovery requests, C.W. Smith and Earl Hennenhoefer are considered agents of Chanbond.
Page 14
5. The term “UnifiedOnline” means UnifiedOnline, Inc., and any and all predecessors, successors, divisions, subsidiaries, or joint ventures thereof, together with any and all parent or affiliated companies or corporations, and all past or present members, shareholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, attorneys, representatives, any past or current investors or persons with an interest in UnifiedOnline, Inc., and all other persons acting or purporting to act or that have acted or purported to have acted on behalf of any of the foregoing
Can you provide more detail on this?
Cisco has a market cap of 226 billion, “immateriality” is a factor here.
Also looked at Cisco 10-q, nothing specific regarding chanbond, although settlement could be considered immaterial here.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1645494/000114420419011641/tv513982_10k.htm
Arris annual F/S. No updates to footnote regarding Chanbond since last 10-q
You might have just set a world record for getting the quickest response ever from a Government agency.
- OR -
This post was completely fabricated.
I am not selling my shares. I am expecting a buyout, settlement or proceeds from a win in court.
Disagree. The shares will be of a privately held company. Yes, no MM's means no share price and no liquidity, but does not necessarily mean worthless either. One could hire a valuation agency such as Empire, VRC, Lincoln, etc. who specializes in PE investments if so desired. Bottom line, as many have stated, majority of people here are not interested in share price.
Hopefully a simple follow up question to this, who would be responsible for distributing the dividend? Assuming this would be Carter?
The fact that they can file to rehear the appeal is nonsense
Dont jinx it
Hoping for more, bought in this way too high.
All the selling was my question as well.
What CEO? Here we go.
Forgive me if this sounds ignorant, but even if the patents do in fact expire in 2020 wouldn't UOIP still be entitled to any infringement prior to expiration if a lawsuit is ongoing?
Welcome to America's legal system
Thanks Khenry. Hate the U.S. legal system, why set deadlines when literally every single one can be pushed back?
Arris 10-Q.
Yes indeed. Curious to see what updates the next 10-Q has to offer.
Technically, there is no contingent liability yet.
There have been multiple documents filed that state Unified Online as the parent to Chanbond.
I'm confused by this. Was there a document attached to the Pacer update today or no?
Same, I have a gtc below the bid but never filled when price dropped.
I'm seeing the same. Pondering whether to buy or not to buy more. Have a sizable position that I am comfortable with, but always room for more.
Cannot short in the greys?
I may be reading too far into this, but I noticed that Chanbond checked "yes" for "Have there been discussions with other parties relating to settlement of this case?", where as Arris checked no. Curious as to what is meant by "other parties" here.
Chanbond:
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A35e07701-054d-4446-a63a-2bbfde1219a2
Arris:
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Accf8b159-d5ee-4b8e-ac3d-0367de087855
Thanks for posting, but I take this with a grain of salt. It would be helpful if there was evidence other than your post on a message board.
Yes indeed the letter is four months old. Final ruling was 10/10.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=144128808
Hopefully the hearing on the 11th will provide some valuations :)