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.
Unbelievable-DD-&-opp!-Can-we-see-10000%-return-on-our-investment-at-current-PPS-levels?
RECAP OF CURRENT CATALYSTS 8-18-2017:
1. Retail exposure..HSN is airing at 7am this morning.
2. 7-lawsuits are in settlement negotiations.
3. Large deals have been signed through Channel Partners.
4. A new investor is partnering with SFOR and should be finalized this month.
5. Largest revenues in SFOR history in 2017.
6. New lawsuits announced once one settlement occurs.
7. New PUSH technology coming in next couple of weeks.
8. The two world premiere IP (both AM 100) lawfirms working with SFOR have numerous attorneys working these 7 lawsuits. How much money is that costing someone? If SFOR were paying for 7 simultaneous lawsuits and the thousands of hours of research and background work, how much money would that be?
IF SFOR WERE GOING BANKRUPT, WHY WOULD ROPES AND GRAY JUST START WORKING WITH THEM ON ALL 7 LITIGATIONS???
Mark Kay has been very honest. Even now is telling us the large deals could take a little longer than expected. I work with numerous large Companies... That is how it works.
Would-you-take-time-to-post-on-any-company-going-Bankrupt..Hmmmm????
Convince-me?? Convince-Ropes-&-Gray!!! They're-the-ones-investing-millions!!
Very interesting. We know that we're close. SFOR left an opening to drive PPS down to get cheap shares.
This ZPaul post should be stickied!!! Please sticky this.
I'm with you. Let me say this, though, that the SFOR team is acutely aware of this. They said...'business will drive the PPS soon'. We either believe it and stay or move on. I see too many good things already in the works here to move on. In fact, I'm solidly on the waiting side.
Team, our day is sure to come. In the meantime, I'm trying to gather the resources together to eat up as many available million-shares as possible for under a penny. What a bargain and I'll be grateful later.
Blue, there are too many catalysts for this company not to take off. Ropes and Gray doesn't invest numerous attorneys for gratis, for the time being until settlement, unless they already know the result. A poster earlier today posted Mark Kay's comment that the lawsuits are going well. That's stating the obvious but it is nice to hear it from him. We know that with Ropes and Gray's impeccable/remarkable track record with IP Litigation that there is no way they would've taken on 7 infringers if they were concerned about losing. In fact, for the last 158 years of their existence they have never offered to take on a client on full-contingency. Strikeforce is the first one. How's that for building confidence.
Bob, did you ask Mark to comment about the lawsuits or did he volunteer this information? Thank you for your response.
Either way we know that numerous eyes are on this Company and when news comes out due to all of the catalysts this will rise quickly.
In my experience SFOR doesn't set expectations such as 'the 2nd will be ok or slightly better' and then it is not. Did they not get paid on time? We know that big deals are done. Mark Kay has already started that "some revenues in the 2nd half of the year should be sizable towards the end of the year". At a minimum they have to be around 700K. I think we need to see a million for the year or more. His statement does lead me to believe that the start of SFOR's future is ready to begin out of the shoot in 2018.
Ropes & Gray LLP is a global law firm with 11 offices located in the United States, Asia and Europe. The firm has more than 1,200 lawyers and professionals worldwide, and its clients include corporations and financial institutions, government agencies, universities, and health care organizations. It was founded in 1865 in Boston, Massachusetts by John Codman Ropes and John Chipman Gray.
FIRST TIME IN THEIR HISTORY WORKING ON FULL CONTINGENCY WITH STRIKEFORCE. EVERYONE, GEAR UP FOR AN UNBELIEVABLE RIDE.
We-love-for-folks-to-keep-offering-those-tasty-shares-below-a-penny!!
Rock-solid-SFOR-Longs-frustrating-to-flippers!!!!!
More-money-being-poured-in...Can-see-the-near-future!
Small-group-of-investors-here-dominate-shares...I-wonder-why?
Yes Sir.. They know that the investors on this board have millions more to spend here.
I think you're right. We are well into the second half of 2017 & are now 14-months in with the first 3 infringers. The new government IP LAWSUIT changes in November 2016 that minimize frivolous patent troll lawsuits should help move along the new 4 lawsuits as well. The fact that all 7 are in settlement negotiation is not new news but helps us realize how close we are. The fact that for the first time in Ropes & Gray's history they're willing to have numerous attorneys fighting several simultaneous lawsuits on behalf of Strikeforce on contingency is mindboggling. That is why we all want as many cheap shares as we can get until this small window is gone forever.
Let's-cut-all-the-bull-here-&-get-our-first-settlement-in-&-get-this-party-started-to-10-cents!!
I'm in share accumulation mode.. Thanks for the cheap shares yesterday & this morning!!
CyberJ IS PUMPING ME UP!! WE KNOW WHAT'S COMING!!
This is classic!! You are not being a SISSY there JANE..LOL!
Thank you Ram! WBC, note his comments about need for RS right now.
That's right. That confirms that the revenues are coming as promised. Mark Kay 'Best year for revenues or DEFINITELY very close"!
Mark Kay..August 14th: "Management estimates that the current funds on hand will be sufficient to continue operations through the next six months." No RS.
PROVE-IT!!!!!!!! I'M-ABOUT-PROVE-THAT-IT-IS-NOT-NEEDED-RIGHT-NOW!!!!
Hate Liars, thank you for proving from Mark Kay's quotes the significant revenues they are coming!
Thank you!!
No ones forgotten. We know what the future holds.
10/18 Supreme Court to determine is all IPR's should be thrown out.
I-like-words-like-'EXPECTING'-&-'DEFINITELY'-for-the-next-few-months-of-our-investment..don't-you!
Jul 13
@StrikeForceTech: "This is definitely an exciting year and we are on track!"
Jul 24
Mark L Kay @marklkay: "We are definitely on track with all we believe we are getting done towards the end of this year. We expect a very exciting year"!
You're right R2R! We reminded everyone of that in 15 minutes at the end of Friday.
Yes Sir but based on current press releases..Can we fast forward 4 months?
Out-of-business???-LAUGHABLE-FOR-ANYONE-IN-THE-KNOW!
Confirmed-that-Blank-Rome/Ropes-&-Gray-are-on-CONTINGENCY. After reading RG's attorney's bios, could SFOR pay for these level attorneys for 7-litigations at one time time!! WOW do we have strong patents!!
Frances Zhang Ropes & Gray bio..
Frances is a registered patent agent in the intellectual property litigation group. Her practice spans a wide array of technologies, including wireless communication standards, software and hardware for consumer electronics, data security, image sensing technology, and biomedical and mechanical devices.
Frances has been actively involved in all stages of patent litigation in district court, the PTAB, and the ITC. She has extensive experience performing invalidity and non-infringement analyses, developing claim construction positions, drafting briefs, and assisting with deposition and trial examination preparation.
In addition to her litigation practice, Frances has experience prosecuting patents related to software and electronic hardware technology in the U.S. and major foreign jurisdictions. She has also worked on numerous due diligence matters involving biomedical and mechanical devices.
As a graduate student at MIT, Frances researched the data privacy practices of popular mobile applications. Her results were featured in the Boston Globe and presented at an international privacy conference. As an undergraduate summer intern, she developed an optimization for a voice-enabled web search engine and was granted a patent as the first named inventor for her work.
EXPERIENCE
StrikeForce Technologies (E.D. Va., D. Mass., PTAB). Currently representing StrikeForce in a series of district court actions involving the assertion of patents relating to out-of-band authentication technology.
Imperium IP Holdings (Cayman), Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics (E.D. Tex.). Represented Samsung in a patent infringement suit concerning image sensors. Jury found patent invalid after a six-day trial.
Samsung Electronics (PTAB). Represented petitioner in an inter partes review concerning image sensors. All challenged claims were found invalid. Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and 4G Capabilities (ITC). Represented defendant Samsung Electronics against a patent infringement suit concerning 4G wireless communication standards.
A Leading Multinational Electronics Company (PTAB). Represented petitioner in an inter partes review concerning software configuration technology.
A U.S. Marketing Technology Company (PTAB). Represented petitioner in an inter partes review concerning location-based marketing applications for mobile devices.
Revolaze v. A Leading U.S. Clothing Retailer (ITC). Represented defendant in a patent infringement suit concerning laser abrasion of fabrics.
Opinion Letters. Experience performing due diligence and drafting opinion letters for patents related to cochlear implants, electromyography, transcranial magnetic stimulation, industrial helmets, scooters, clothing design, and consumer shopping applications.
Patent Prosecution. Experience drafting and prosecuting patents in U.S. and foreign jurisdictions related to digital media systems, memory devices, encoding algorithms, wireless communication circuitry, and financial systems.
Steve Pepe Ropes & Gray bio..
Steve is an accomplished trial lawyer who focuses on patent litigation in nearly every significant patent jurisdiction, including the International Trade Commission, the Eastern District of Texas, the District of Delaware, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the PTAB. Steve has litigated patent cases for over 20 years, including as lead or co-lead counsel in over a dozen lawsuits. He specializes in complex infringement cases and has achieved numerous successes for companies in the fields of computer technology, semiconductors, telecommunications, consumer products, and mechanical systems. Steve is experienced in managing and coordinating multi-jurisdictional disputes that involve parallel actions in U.S. district courts, the International Trade Commission, and foreign jurisdictions. Steve works with diverse clients and cases that range from high-profile, “bet-the-company” litigations for Fortune 500 companies to smaller litigations for rapidly growing start-up technology companies.
Steve has been involved in multiple PTAB proceedings and has been at the forefront of the law relating to standard essential patents and FRAND. Steve has been recognized as a Super Lawyer every year since 2013.
EXPERIENCE
Co-lead counsel representing StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. in a series of district court actions involving the assertion of its patents relating to out-of-band authentication techniques and systems. Current pending cases include actions in the District of Massachusetts (Gemalto, Inc.; Vasco Data Security) and the Eastern District of Virginia (SecureAuth Corp.; Entrust, Inc.). Also representing StrikeForce in defense of one of its patents in inter partes review proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Certain L-Tryptophan, L-Tryptophan Products, and Their Methods of Production (337-TA-1005) – Counsel defending CJ CheilJedang adverse to its competitor Ajinomoto in a two-patent dispute relating to genetically-modified bacteria for the production of L-tryptophan.
Imperium IP Holdings (Cayman), Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics: Co-lead counsel in a case relating to three patents directed to functionality of image sensors and camera modules. The case involved a six-day trial in the Eastern District of Texas.
Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and 4G Capabilities: Co-lead counsel on behalf of Samsung Electronics in an ITC investigation, including an eight-day trial, brought by InterDigital relating to seven patents directed to 3G and 4G standards.
Certain Devices Containing Non-Volatile Memory and Products Containing the Same: Represented Spansion in an ITC investigation, including a five day trial, brought by Macronix relating to three patents directed to flash memory.
Certain Devices Containing Non-Volatile Memory and Products Containing the Same: Lead counsel on behalf of Spansion in a second ITC investigation brought by Macronix relating to 3 patents directed to flash memory.
Motorola Mobility LLC v. Microsoft: Managed and co-led the Motorola team in multiple litigations against Microsoft involving over 30 patents, including patents essential to the 802.11, H.264 and 3G standards, asserted in various jurisdictions including the International Trade Commission, the Southern District of Florida, the Western District of Wisconsin, and the Western District of Washington. The dispute involved novel FRAND issues and included three trials, including two in the International Trade Commission.
Certain Television Sets, Television Receiver, Television Tuners and Components Thereof: Defended Samsung Electronics in an ITC investigation relating to two patents directed to television tuners. Led a team that successfully obtained summary determination of non-infringement for a design-around product.
Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices and Battery Packs: Co-lead counsel on behalf of Motorola in an ITC investigation against RIM relating to five patents, including a patent essential to the 802.11 standard, directed to features of wireless devices. RIM settled with Motorola shortly before the Markman hearing as part of a global settlement of all litigation between Motorola and RIM.
Motorola v. Research in Motion: Managed and co-led the Motorola team in multiple litigations against RIM involving of over 20 patents, including patents essential to the 802.11 standard, asserted in various jurisdictions including the International Trade Commission, the District of Delaware and the Eastern District of Texas.
Visual Content IP, LLC v. HTC America, Inc.: Lead counsel for Samsung Electronics in a case filed in the Eastern District of Texas relating to three patents directed to image capture and processing.
Certain Digital Televisions and Certain Products Containing Same and Methods Using Same: Lead counsel on behalf of Polaroid in a successfully concluded ITC litigation relating to two patents directed to digital televisions and the ATSC standard.
Praxair, Inc. v. Advanced Technology Materials, Inc.: Represented Praxair in multi-district litigation against ATMI relating to systems for the controlled discharge of toxic gases. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Southern District of New York’s summary judgment ruling that ATMI’s patents were invalid. In a separate case, a federal jury in Delaware, after an eight-day jury trial, found that ATMI infringed two Praxair patents.
Syndia Corp. v. The Gillette Company: Represented Gillette in a three-week jury trial on four patents relating to a plasma-enhanced PVD process used in manufacturing the MACH3 razor blade.
Motorola, Inc. v. VTech Communications, Inc. et al.: Co-lead counsel in a successfully concluded litigation relating to five patents covering telecommunication products and features.
DataSci, LLC v. e Trials Worldwide, Inc.: Co-lead counsel in a successfully concluded litigation relating to a patent directed to centralized collection of data using the Internet.
Akrion, Inc. v. Solid State Equipment Corporation: Co-lead counsel in a successfully concluded litigation relating to six patents directed to semiconductor processing.
PUBLICATIONS
Co-author, “Promega: Can Inducer And Infringer Be The Same Party Now?,” Law360 (March 16, 2015)
Cited, “Spansion Targets Macronix Patents In PTAB Review Petitions,” Law360 (July 22, 2014)
PRESENTATIONS
Moderator, “Cross-Jurisdictional IP Litigation Interplay - Pet Peeves from the Bench on Timing, Discovery, Evidence, Claim Construction and the Management of Joint Proceedings, Practice Recommendations for Counsel from the Federal District Court, PTAB and ITC Bench” (December 2016)
Presenter, “Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2016: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing,” (June 2016)
Presenter, “Recent Issues and Trends in IP Disputes in the U.S. and Korea,” Seoul, Korea (May 2016)
Presenter, “Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2015: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing,” (June 2015)
Presenter, “Patent Drafting & Prosecution: A Trial Lawyer’s Perspective,” PLI Patent Prosecution Boot Camp (June 13, 2014)
Kevin Post Ropes & Gray bio..
Kevin works extensively with high-technology and life science companies handling their complex patent disputes. He has litigated patent cases in nearly every significant patent jurisdiction, including the International Trade Commission, the District of Delaware, the Northern District of California, the Eastern District of Texas, the Eastern District of Virginia, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on behalf of companies in a variety of technical fields, including telecommunications, electronics, computer systems and software, network architecture and security, e-payments, e-commerce, imaging systems, GPS technology, process control systems, mechanical devices, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. Kevin has tried multiple cases involving standard-essential patents and RAND licensing issues, including breach of contract cases. From providing licensing support, patent portfolio analysis and due diligence to handling all aspects of trial preparation and trial, Kevin’s experience has touched on all phases of IP litigation.
EXPERIENCE
Co-lead counsel representing StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. in a series of district court actions involving the assertion of its patents relating to out-of-band authentication techniques and systems. Current pending cases include actions in the District of Massachusetts (Gemalto, Inc.; Vasco Data Security) and the Eastern District of Virginia (SecureAuth Corp.; Entrust, Inc.). Also representing StrikeForce in defense of one of its patents in inter partes review proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Defending Samsung Electronics in multiple district court litigations regarding image sensors and imaging software.
Defending the world’s leading consumer electronics company in district court litigation regarding electronic sale and transmission of music and video, and data storage and access systems.
Defended Samsung Electronics in an ITC Investigation brought by InterDigital related to 3G and 4G standards wireless standards and RAND licensing.
Defended the world’s leading consumer electronics company in district court litigation regarding computer operating systems.
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola Mobility LLC. (W.D. Wash., W.D. Wis., S.D. Fla.); In the Matter of Certain Gaming and Entertainment Systems, Related Software, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-752): Represented Motorola in a multi-district dispute between Motorola and Microsoft involving patents directed to telecommunications standards, digital video coding technology, mobile browsing technology, digital set-top boxes, gaming technology, and smartphone features and functionality, among other technologies. The cases also involved contract-based claims directed to RAND licensing issues.
Motorola, Inc. v. Research In Motion, Ltd. (N.D. Tex.); In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices and Battery Packs (U.S.I.T.C.): Represented Motorola in an ITC Investigation against RIM involving five patents relating to telecommunications standards, battery packs and smartphone features, as well as district court litigation involving patent claims and contract claims related to RAND licensing.
Motorola, Inc. v. VTech Communications, Inc. (E.D. Tex.): Represented Motorola in a successfully concluded litigation involving six patents asserted against VTech relating to telecommunication products and features.
NTP, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. (E.D. Va.): Represented Motorola in defense of an eight-patent patent infringement lawsuit related to wireless e-mail technology.
Genetic Technologies Limited v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. (D. Colo., N.D. Cal.): Represented Agilent in defense of litigation regarding DNA testing and analysis.
Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. v. Control Systems International, Inc. (S.D. Tex.): Represented Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. in a two-patent cross-suit involving automated control systems for industrial processes.
PUBLICATIONS
Cited, “Federal Circuit Keeps Alice Patent Ruling in $533 Million Apple Suit,” Law360 (June 12, 2017)
Co-author, “Comparing U.S. and EPO Approaches to Diagnostic Patents,” Bloomberg BNA’s World Intellectual Property Report (June 2017)
Cited, “Full Federal Circuit Urged to Eye Alice Nix in $533 Million Apple Case,” Law360 (April 17, 2017)
Cited, “Federal Circuit Kills 3 Patents in $533M Apple Case Under Alice,” Law360 (March 1, 2017)
Cited, “Fed. Circ. Grants Stays To Apple, Samsung In Smartflash Case,” Law360 (July 10, 2015) (Subscription required)
Cited as “Legal Lion,” “Law360's Weekly Verdict: Legal Lions & Lambs,” Law360 (July 9, 2015) (Subscription required)
Cited, “Judge Tosses $533M Verdict Against Apple in Patent Row,” Law360 (July 7, 2015) (Subscription required)
Cited, “Apple Dodges Potential $1.6B Award In Smartflash IP Suit,” Law360 (July 2, 2015) (Subscription required)
PRESENTATIONS
Speaker, Managing IP PTAB Forum, “Identifying the Best Strategies for You to Deal with the Administrative Changes” (May 16, 2017)
Presenter, “The Dollars, Cents and Due Diligence of Pharmaceutical Patent Life Cycle Management and Litigation Planning,” American Conference Institute’s (ACI) 11th Aannual “Paragraph IV Disputes” Conference, “The Dollars, Cents and Due Diligence of Pharmaceutical Patent Life Cycle Management and Litigation Planning” (April 24, 2017)
Speaker, ACI Expert Forum on ITC Litigation & Enforcement, “Can Recent Rule Changes Facilitate Efficient Resolution of Section 337 Cases?” (February 22, 2017)
Speaker, Ropes & Gray IP Master Class Financial Services Roundtable, “Post-Alice: Getting and Enforcing FinTech Patents” (April 28,2016)