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.
No rights? When a patent is granted, the patent is a PROPERTY right! Property rights are some of the strongest rights we have!
The “bigs” lobbied the Obama admin hard to get the AIA law passed to DIMINISH the property rights of patents so they can continue infringe with less risk of accountability.
I’ll take 20 for 1!
DB - Absolutely correct! Same with me. I even ADDED another 500,000 shares to my position earlier this week. If I didn’t believe in what VPLM is doing, I would have liquidated my position entirely!
Again, maybe this stock or investing isn’t for everyone!
Funny! Same could be said about the predictions of trip zeros coming soon! Maybe this stock isn’t for everyone.
Very interesting. Seems like the Federal judges are finally onto the past schemes & corrupt practices of Apple & the previous PTAB. Time will tell how this all affects VPLM!
Exactly! And it’s been PROVEN in the IPR trials that Apple, nor anyone else being implicated for possible infringement, has nothing that disallowed the VPLM patents therefore VPLM is the lawful owner of the technology! Courts will rule that soon enough!
Your comments may be right about developing new tech first however if Apple or anyone else TRULY discovered the patented VPLM tech first, how and why did they fail on the antedating argument in the IPR trials? How can this be? It’s illogical to believe that Apple has anything that could’ve disallowed the VPLM patents many years ago AND they chose to spend/waste money defending multiple lawsuits by not bring the “proof” forward before now.
Proof?
Agreed! Nothing is ever a slam dunk but the stars are seeming to line up for VPLM!
Never said there was PROVEN infringement in my post. It’s awesome how words & facts get twisted & pivoted to different ideas when there’s no defense of one’s position!
Infringement meter = running total of potential damages that could be awarded to VPLM if/when it is proven that others unlawfully used VPLM patented technology!
Not correct! The IPR FWD is being appealed! The actual patents were affirmed in the 8-0 PTAB FWD and are still in force!
The VPLM infringement meter is still running while we await a final ruling on Apple’s weak Motion for Re-trail and as the District court proceedings continue. If I recall correctly, Apple filed the FWD appeal early so they didn’t “miss the deadline.” The Appeals court stayed the appeal & remanded it to the PTAB to wait on the final ruling by the PTAB Board on the Re-trial Motion.
Read the court docs for the truth. There’s a lot of misinformation posted daily on this message board!
Seriously dude?
I’m trying to understand your point about the “new” lawsuits. I’ve been in this stock for a long time and believe in what they’re doing.
I never asked you to do any DD on my behalf...I was just looking for the detail to support the opinion! I won’t bother to engage in any future posts!
Enjoy the ride!
I know all the case we’ll. Specially which case numbers are you referring to? Posting “generalizations” about cases doesn’t help anybody.
Another informed warning of impending doom!
When do the bankruptcy preceding start so I can have my popcorn ready!
SMFH
Patents ARE NOT “approved” by courts of law! Patents are granted by the USPTO. Once granted, they can be CHALLENGED in the PTAB and/or district court preceding. The trial is to determine if the VALIDITY of the granted patent are will be FULLY AFFIRMED(UPHELD), PARTIALLY AFFIRMED, or REVERSED!
VPLM has ALREADY been granted patents, some of which have already been UPHELD by the PTAB 8-0!
All excellent points Spyke. It’s great when we can have intelligent response based on facts surrounding VPLM rather than the negative conjecture thrown around all day.
Hopefully the PTAB will rule soon on the pending motion for retrial. Those who understand the facts in the IPR trials realize this motion equates to a 1,000 yard Hail Mary for Apple.
Which “new” case are you referring to. Please prove the case you’re talking about. I’d like to read up on it.
Once an IPR is filed against a patent claim, and the IPR goes through final written decision to uphold the claim, a new IPR cannot be filed against the same claim. There are defined limits in the IPR process.
Wait, what’s that Up? Double entry accounting? You don’t say, that is where both sides of the ledger must balance.
Hmm, seems like standardized GAAP for fully reporting & audited Corporations.
Accounting is hard and not for everybody!
Or maybe there really is NOTHING illegal or underhanded going on hear so there’s no reason to publish anything negative about VPLM!
Surely if all the illegal trading or unscrupulous accounting were actually happening, somehow with all the current litigation going through the district courts, somebody would blow the whistle to stop VPLM in their tracks, no?
So if the TOP LAWYER at Apple is willing to risk his job to enrich himself, it sure would make sense that he may have been willing to illegally collaborate with the past PTAB board to tilt the IPR results to benefit Apple. Fortunately, VPLM was wise to them and was able to bring the possible corruption into the light!
Also, the Government/SEC was willing to file charges against Apple’s TOP LAWYER because he illegally traded shares...does anyone here think that if Emil or any VPLM board member were doing similar things (as many on the MB suggest over & over), the SEC & class action lawyers would be all over this with criminal indictments?
Not sure that’s the way the court system works. The “courts” don’t randomly dismiss cases because they’re overloaded. Most of the “bullshit” cases are brought on by the big corps against the little guys. The VPLM cases are the exact opposite so the logic of a bogus case doesn’t hold up. It’s already been determined by the circuit court in Neveda that VPLM has standing in the cases otherwise ALL of the original lawsuits would have been summarily dismissed as frivolous long before all cases were transferred & joined into a single preceding. The cases are preceding as the “courts” determined at the pre-trial scheduling. The courts are following the well documented process of the law...this isn’t unique to the VPLM cases.
Read the court docs and try to follow along.
P2P - I saw you posted a copied version of VPs Opposition to Apple's weak motion to dismiss but I'm guessing many people haven't seen it. The actual document is over 300 pages long when all exhibits & affidavits are included however the main document (#81) that contains the Intro, Argument, & Conclusion is only 33 pages.
If anybody is interested in reading it, I've made it public at the link below. Enjoy the facts!
2-7-19 VPLM Opposition Filing
What case was this for? Can you please post the case number? I'd like to read the docs.
Wait...maybe it has to do with the cases being consolidated into the Northern District of California. Why would you need attorneys based out of Las Vegas if the case isn't in Nevada any longer?
Did anyone see this filing (Document 55) by Apple yesterday in
Case 5:18-cv-06216-LHK?
Weird, wonder why a company so big would need to dumped an attorney????
"Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1 (c)(2)(C), Apple Inc. hereby gives notice of the withdrawal of
Michael J. McCue and Meng Zhong of the firm, Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, 3993
Howard Hughes Pkwy, Suite 600, Las Vegas, Nevada 89169, as attorneys of record for Apple Inc.
in this matter. Apple Inc. will continue to be represented in this action by Desmarais LLP."
No worries DB. I get it and agree that we are sitting well. You're right about the all the unsolicited "expert opinions." The fact still remains that we have downside risk of 1x but upside potential many times that.
Time will tell...
Here you go...
1-16-19 Joint Case Management Order
Here's a link to the VPLM response. If you take the time to read it, you will see that it was an excellent rebuttal based on FACTS of the trial and final written decision. Go VPLM!
VPLM Response to Apple Rehearing Request 1-22-19
I have read that lawsuit in full and don't agree with your assessment. Why does Kipping keep delaying and avoiding deposition is he's so innocent and sure to win?
Thanks DB...missed that info.
Thanks DB...missed that info.
Thanks DB...missed that info.
Agreed! For those with real interest in VP cases, the best approach is to read the actual court filings and ignore the negative chatter. I will continue to post any pertinent court filings I see. If there is a document that somebody is interested in, let me know and I'll see what I can do to get it posted.
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."
- Terry Pratchett
Yes Butter the cases were consolidated.
Here are links to the Case Management Order and the First Amended Complaint.
VOIP Consolidated Case Management Order
Voip vs Twitter First Amended Complaint
DB - You're correct. Case movement in the Twitter case and also indicates that ALL OTHER STAYS are lifted and cases proceeding. The filing seems to indicate that all the patent infringement cases may be joined in the Norther District of CA.
For all those interested in seeing the proposed case schedule, it's listed in Appendix A starting on Page 9. Now we have FACTS on a potential timeline for the court cases...would be nice if the PTAB would get off their butts and make a decision on the bogus motion.
Here's a link to Voip-Pal vs Twitter Joint Case Management Statement Paper 61.
Great points bird! We keep hearing all about dilution, but have any of the people prognosticating about it actually took the time to calculate how said dilution would affect the stock price when VPLM wins in court (aka the up side)?
If so, I don't think they'd really care about even 100% dilution unless they are SOOOOOOOO greedy that no return is or would be good enough for them. If not, then it seems like they're in it for a short term profits or quick buck...which is fine if that's the motivation.
So let's look at an example based on the following data & assumptions:
Verifiable Data
Close price 9/25: $ .0725 per share
Market Cap 9/25: $ 107,856,157
Shares outstanding: 1,487,671,135 (from OTC Markets as of 9/14)
Assumptions
1) You bought 1,000,000 shares at close of $.0725 = $ 72,500 initial investment not including trading/brokerage fees
2) 100% dilution would increased outstanding shares to 2,975,342,270 (ridiculous assumption)
3) VPLM is awarded & receives $ 5,000,000,000 damages in September of 2019 (low estimate)
4) Legal fees are paid by defendants and don't affect the award value
5) You never bought or sold another share of VPLM & cashed out in September of 2019
Based on the example above, one year later your initial investment of $ 72,500 would be worth $ 1,680,478 or 2,318% ROI. The resulting, fully diluted share price would be approx. $ 1.68 per share. Not a bad for 100% stock dilution and 1 year worth of waiting. Please, poke holes in this example & provide a logical explanation as to why it's wrong besides the usual "can't win against the Bigs", "is a POS Stock" or "Emil is the devil" rhetoric.
Hopefully this simple example will help explain why us longs don't really care about dilution or worry about reverse splits. We're in it because our due diligence told us the the longer term return is potentially worth the risk. So please, don't waste our time trying to convince us that dilution or reverse splits will "ruin" or devalue our investments.
Here's a link to a spreadsheet that might help further understand the example if anybody is interested:
VPLM Dilution Calcs
Attorneys showed up. Looks like they got a continuation until 9/26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Motion to Compel (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Bulla, Bonnie)
09/19/2018, 09/26/2018
Plaintiff's, Counterdefendants', and Third-Party Defts' Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions
Parties Present
Result: Matter Continued
=====================================================================
Here's a link to the Clark County Court. Click on the link and you should see the Home page for the Eighth Judicial District Court.
Follow these steps to get to the actual case info:
1) Scroll down and click on Court Case Lookup
2) Scroll down on Portal page and click on Smart Search
3) Enter A-15-717491-C in the "Search Criteria" field
4) Type the security characters you see into the "Captcha Code" field
5) Click the Submit button
6) The case listing will show up in the search results
7) Click on the case number to get to the case detail
8) Scroll down to the Events and Hearings section
9) All case information is shown. Scroll down to find latest info
Happy Reading...Hope this helps.
Don't know. This case is being tried in Nevada Civil court and they don't provide detailed info like we can get on Pacer. We'll see what gets posted after this hearing.