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.
Hopefully.
It won't be Comm either.
If UOIP receives a buyout offer, it's likely you will be asked to tender your shares.
Again, I'm not the one who said they could get an injunction. I said it would have to be approved by the judge. How are they gonna pay if they're not making money?
Comcast was offered the patents at bargain basement prices. They made it clear they prefer to use the patents for free. Why pay, when the specs are publicly posted with the USPTO?
Probably would cause further delays with whiny, heavily redacted or sealed letters to the judge. These sniveling thieves only need to shell out 1% of the profits they've made from these patents, and look at the lengths they've gone to so far.
I don't think an injunction will be in Chanbond best interest.
Well, if they can't serve their clients of today without the technology they stole from Chanbond, then by all means they should just keep using it...
I didn't say I think the judge will invoke an injunction. What I meant was it can't happen unless the court approves. The providers could, however, go back to what they used prior. It wouldn't necessarily shut them down.
Court has to approve an injunction.
I thought they were really close to a settlement? Why would they go to court?
I'm with you. Even if the case is kept consolidated for trial, I think the 13 can file separate appeals.
How did they "list" round one in the Delaware court? We're still in round one. lol
Insurers for some of the 13 (with the exception of Comcast at the very least, since we know they had six years of communication with the creators before the lawsuit was filed) are more likely to cover than COMM's insurer. COMM went into the merger knowing that Arris was on the hook for the 13 and that they failed to challenge the patents until AFTER the deadline and lost on appeal. This information was all a matter of public record on PACER and in Arris's filings. If COMM thinks they will get unlimited use of the tech and billions in revenue while their insurer picks of the tab, they're nuts. There is no way they COULDN'T have known. In fact, immediately after the merger was finalized, COMM had a public filing acknowledging the indemnification and stated that they were considering filing their own challenge.
There were some separate filings by Charter awhile back indicating that they might not be happy with their counsel.
I think the judge stipulated it after they agreed. No matter, if the 13 didn't challenge the order at the time, then it can be construed that they agreed.
She laid down the law, "Counsel is available should the court have any questions." I guess Judge Andrews has no choice. (sarcasm font)
Comm is going bankrupt, regardless. No company can survive a nose-dive like the one they just made. It's like a swan dive off the high board into an empty pool. The one tick flippers down here in pinky land will have fun flipping that one soon enough.
They're just slimy, disgusting and vile. I hope when this is over they all end up bankrupt.
I believe they did file them separately, then requested that they be consolidated and the 13 agreed.
They certainly piss me off. Charter owns 3 of the other defendants. Do they each want a separate trial? What ridiculousness.
I thought Chanbond sued each individual initially and then either Chanbond or the providers requested that they be consolidated and all agreed?
They did agree to a joint trial, and have been in agreement for 4 years now. Unbelievable.
This is just another delay tactic, like the 5th theory in the 11th hour. I truly can't see Judge Andrews allowing 13 separate trials after 4 years now. Ridiculous.
Oh, Jesus Christo, now they're trying more delay tactics? They agreed to consolidate the case years ago. Now they want 13 separate trials?!
We do have every single patent. There were just portions of the '822 that didn't specifically mention "RF" channel.
I don't see it that way. RF is mentioned in other specs in the patent. It still holds up.
The defense will bring those wins up. Chanbond should focus the jury on the fact that, although portions of the patent terminology on the '822 are vague, all of the components in the patent are required for efficacy and the patent is still validated.
The appeal hearing wasn't set when the judge decided not to set the remaining dates. At any rate, I'm sure judge Andrews has other cases. Maybe he wasn't following this case as closely as we are.
We would have seen the filing for Chanbond's rebuttal of the 5th theory. The Judge mentioned they could proceed with Daubert and schedule the trial once the appeal was over, and he would consider Chanbond's reply to the 5th theory separately from Daubert before trial.
They have to get through Daubert first. I think October or November is more realistic. Chanbond hasn't responded to the 5th theory Judge Andrews allowed.
Chanbond is asking for a trial date.
So it looks like the crows were mistaken. Good to see this thing is finally moving forward.
They are not acknowledging infringement. Or they haven't been. They've been grasping at straws to have the case dismissed while arguing the value.
I don't have cable or a phone. I rarely watched TV, and my provider ticked me off when my internet kept crashing. Crashed six times in 15 minutes one morning when I was trying to place an order and I finally gave up and left for appointments. The stock I was trying to buy ran that day. I would have made $15,000 that day if I had been able to place my order and the stock ran for a couple of days. That was the second time that happened. My internet worked fine between 5:30 am and 6:30 am every morning, but suddenly slowed to a crawl at 6:30 on the nose when the market opened and then would be fine again after 1:00 pm. So I decided they could pay for it, and I canceled the phone and the cable. They tried to sell me an upgrade when I called, but I told them I would think about it and call back once I saved $15 grand on my cable bill. Saved me $70 a month. Got just under 17 years to think about it, but I don't miss it at all. I still pay $70 for internet, but it doesn't crash nearly as much and I didn't need an upgrade afterall. hmmm. Trust me, the 13 would not want me on the jury. My carrier is one of those named in the suit.
It depends on whether there is a settlement and UOIP remains a going concern and decides to go after the remaining infringers or if there is a buyout. If there is a buyout, you'll be asked to tender your shares. With a settlement, there was talk of a one time dividend and further legal action against other infringers and royalties by someone on the board. There could be a settlement with no dividend followed by a buyout. It all depends on the terms. I don't think anyone on this board or any of the crows he or she may be conversing with are privileged to the particulars of the specifics regarding negotiations.
Seeking an indemnification agreement from the supplier of the stolen tech does not exonerate cable providers and provide them free license to continue to use the stolen property. Possession is 9/10s of the law. Attorneys learn this before they even get to law school. The fact that they were notified by the owners of the patent AND indemnified by the company that provided the technology negates the plausible deniability defense.
The attorneys for the 13 would likely be looking at a malpractice suit if they didn't make every attempt at summary judgment. However, it seems to me the main argument in the last several filings submitted by the 13 has been value.
Arris, with their 2 billionth sale of stolen tech just a few months before that sale, made out pretty well. I can't believe Bruce as sacked. (Sarcasm font)
I don't think Chanbond has even responded to the 5th theory dropped on them at the end of expert discovery, have they?