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.
DON'T C 1M share bid; 24,602 @ 23
2 may indicate MM needs shares, but do not take PPS down.
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=013692;p=0
If OTC short report accurate, someone is naked (at least) 3.5M shares. Sometimes done in U.S. (illegal?), but definitely seen from abroad (foreign exchanges).
This link is sometimes slow but a graph should appear.
https://otcshortreport.com/company/UOIP
CDEL probably thought sell @ 25 and easily cover @ 20.
CDEL was the buyer @ 20 for a couple of days. No fills (or < 20k).
Appears to be slowly starting to try to cover.
NewBreedd also saw it b/c wrote, we should all start buying.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=139277237
Update: CDEL buying @ .0023.
CDEL was the seller of 3M+ the other day @ .0025.
Also, believe the naked short is/was CDEL.
No to little "Equity Short Interest".
https://otcshortreport.com/company/UOIP
Good minds think alike.
BID-----------------------------------ASK
ETRF----.0021----272,857--------NITE----.0025----179,335
CANT----.0020----150,000--------ETRF----.0030-----10,000
NITE----.0020-----10,000--------CSTI----.0031----145,000
CSTI----.0014----363,166--------CANT----.0032----555,000
CDEL----.0012----800,000--------CDEL----.0036----150,000
BMIC----.0001-----10,000--------BMIC----.0572-----10,000
https://otcshortreport.com/company/UOIP
Also, ZW, saw post yesterday. Appears missed the boat on that one.
Probably cross-trading b/t MMs (or something).
Old article but tactics still used.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=18742
No problemÖ.
Once Arris out of the way, could start moving again.
Who knows?
The question is... R U done Hunting & Gathering shares?
Some, like myself, may be dollar cost averaging in when have opportunity.
I'm happy if goes up, and don't mind if goes down. Awaiting the end-game.
Possible buyout of .25-.50, but if go for $1, then may have trial.
If win at trial, $1 = $3 could be "The new math".
Couldn't even imagine. Life changing opportunity.
Long UOIP, Go UOIP, March Madness Pick = ÜÖIP
Totally bogus. Fake news. Just perused article.
Busy, busy today. Mind occupied elsewhere. Can't multi-multi-multi task.
Need to insure myself what reading. Makes no sense.
Spring forward has thrown me off.
The issue is if going to trial or settlement.
I'm guestimating settlement b/c of treble damages, but never know.
Cisco's got a new CEO. Cable companies cannot be happy.
Arris decision should provide more insight.
The big timeline however is the $5M 2020 payment due.
Oops.
ER = EmployeR. EE = EmployeE.
Fat-finger.
Also, "So long" Cisco EEs.
Feel bad for them, but that's the nature of business.
Promising for us?
Saving lots of money, moola, dinero.
Interesting. Bery, Bery Interesting.
Up to 27% of 72,900 FTEs ~ 19,600. Wow, Whoa, Wild!
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/CSCO/profile?p=CSCO
What Notice Must an EE Provide for Layoffs?
https://www.thebalance.com/notice-of-layoff-or-termination-1917605
Right On, Right On AllIn
Just "Dollar Cost Averaging" in.
Shopping when can.
Yes, it's a LT buy but not 4 TA reasons.
Technical Analysis on OTC Penny Stocks?
TA works (sometimes) b/c programmed algos trigger activity since has blossomed into an accepted and followed trading principle & methodology.
HFT, Hedgie, Big Banks & Institutional Investors have them programmed according to their key proprietary metrics & indicators.
Do NOT think penny stocks (especially OTC, that is) qualify. JMO.
Thank U 4 your input & good luck nevertheless.
You're quite the active MB poster StockTradeMan
Terrific ZombyWolf. Let's C some Magic.
It should happen one of these days.
Board just toooo quiet since no news & MMs boxing, cross-trading or doing their thing.
Outstanding profile as well. B&B.
On Egregious Misconduct Post, v = checkmark or Alt 251, but converted to "v".
I believe all 9 criteria have been accounted for. To prove.........difficult?
https://www.theiplawblog.com/2016/06/articles/copyright-law/watch-out-supreme-court-opens-door-to-treble-damages-in-patent-cases-2/
ZW: We need your "Paint Dry" input.
Took off immediately after posted your comment on Dec 27th, 2017.
Maybe you have "The Shine", R "Prophetic", "Got the Touch".
The MMs are just playing their games.
Where's BMIC 4 newcomers and those still hunting & gathering?
https://finance.yahoo.com/chart/UOIP#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
Au revoir, Michel de Nostredame (Nostradamus)
Longer goes, more likely Egregious Misconduct
Egregious Misconduct
v 1. whether the infringer deliberately copied the ideas or design of another;
v 2. whether the infringer, when he knew of the other's patent protection, investigated the scope of the patent and formed a good-faith belief that it was invalid or that it was not infringed;
v 3. the infringer's behavior as a party to the litigation;
v 4. defendant's size and financial condition;
v 5. closeness of the case;
v 6. duration of defendant's misconduct;
v 7. remedial action by the defendant;
v 8. defendant's motivation for harm;
v 9. attempt to conceal misconduct.
Scruffer <> IP patent attorney but portrays one during bouts of psychosis on this MB.
Scruffer = Believes this could be one of the largest intellectual property judgments if no settlement reached.
Soon, "No where else to run"; "Don't put us on the back burner"; "Gotta help us out".
But, once again, corruption DOES exist!
Obvious MMs have been BOXING since 3/1.
Who bids in odd lot quantities?
Saw bid of 1,666,666 @ .0018 before but that's $3000.
Can see it happening occasionally, but has become routine--on both Bid and Ask side(s).
What happened to MMs making, creating and maintaining a fluid & ordering market.
We should all just walk away for a week, 2 weeks, a month?
Hope everyone has 75-90% of their long position.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=18742
Those...
Only open orders R showing, like GTC.
And welcome. Just in time. Unbelievable potential & opportunity.
Read & check-out for yourself however. Excellent DD (Due diligence) on this stock.
Once the market opens for OTC stocks (no extended hours) @ 8:30 CST, the daily Bid-Ask orders will begin to appear.
The stock has been trading b/t .0018 and .003 lately.
MMs (Market Makers) appear to be trying to increase price.
Very little volume and/or float lately.
GL.
Purposely overlook something, "Patent not Negated". Oops.
Feel great. Thank ¥ÖÜ 4 inquiring.
Common Law is based on precedent. The entire patent "As a whole" is not negated if some claims unpatentable.
Worth the risk. Do not know a stock where ROR > 50 to 100+ from current price.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=138821948
Moreover, with Carter's contract to pay $5M and 44.7M shares, and his ~75% holding, as well as, with Whitman & company, it's a bet cannot pass-up.
Each to his or her own.
Now if I can only find my mind.
Tot Mkt Cap ~600B+, Rev, Net Inc
___MC______Rev_____NI__
__3.5B____2.2B___300.7M == Cogeco, CCA.TO (acquired Atlantic Broadband)
__4.1B____909M___117.7M == Cable One, CABO
_14.1B____9.3B___(971M) == Altice USA, ATUS [acquired Cablevision & Suddenlink (Cequel)]
100.2B___41.6B_____9.9B == Charter, Inc, CHTR (acquired Bright House Networks)
183.3B___84.5B____22.7B == Comcast, CMCSA
___xxx____1.5B_____158M == Mediacom, LLC
_74.5B___31.3B_____5.3B == Time Warner, TWX
__4.6B_____xxx______xxx == TPG Capital (acquired WaveDivision 2.3B, RCN 1.6B, Grande 650M)
__925M____1.2B_____103M == WideOpenWest, WOW
__4.9B____6.6B____93.1M == Arris, ARRS
215.3B___48.1B___(1.4B) == Cisco, CSCO
Sources: Bloomberg, Yahoo Finance Statistics, Home Page & Wikipedia
JME (Estimate).
Scruffer =
Terrific. More DD, the better. TY Ice.
It appears to be a no-brainer, but Cisco & the 13 (now ~10 through acquisitions) have REACH!!!
Adds Unique & Alternate Perspective to MB.
It should be: jOYFUL bALMY bRAINIAC bUDDIES.
All positive & complimentary affirmations.
"claimed invention as a whole" is KEY!
Plus, have other 2 patents.
Rhetorical question jOYFUL bALMY bRAINY bUDDY.
Patentability shall NOT be NEGATED; Lawsuit Proceeding
35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Patentability shall NOT be NEGATED by the manner in which the invention was made.
Taken from the Ninth Edition of the MPEP, Revision 08.2017, Last Revised in January 2018
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
https://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/103.html
verb (used with object), negated, negating.
1. to deny the existence, evidence, or truth of:
2. to nullify or cause to be ineffective:
verb (used without object), negated, negating.
3. to be negative; bring or cause negative results:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/negate?s=t
(Hopefully) Carter =
Just keep reading until Ice2014's Post 39461.
No one knows. Even the lawyers and judges don't know; hence, the contradicting ruling by higher court.
This is the reason in legal battle.
My belief is moving forward. Still have other patents, specifically:
we observed that “Petitioner does not explain why this would be the case and does NOT cite to any evidence” to support the conclusion that an ordinarily skilled artisan would understand “RF channel” to include CDMA and code channels (id.).
https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/ptab-filings%2FIPR2016-01744%2F28
If knew, would be professional trader.
May sell-off some with heavy buying at a certain threshold.
But then again, one more hurdle cleared to trial.
This may be the very catalyst papa p wrote about--discounted acquisition and/or settlement.
Direct Infringement; Invalidity; Willfulness; Egregious Misconduct
Something to consider from all the exceptional DD provided by you all.
Direct Infringement
“Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States or importsinto the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.”
Invalidity
“The question the Court confronts today concerns whether a defendant’s belief regarding patent validity is a defense to a claim of induced infringement. It is not.
Willful Intent
“When the damages are not found by a jury, the court shall assess them. In either event the court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.”
>> Knowledge of the asserted patent
>> No “good-faith” basis to believe that your behavior (making, using, selling, etc.) does not infringe
Egregious Misconduct
1. whether the infringer deliberately copied the ideas or design of another;
2. whether the infringer, when he knew of the other's patent protection, investigated the scope of the patent and formed a good-faith belief that it was invalid or that it was not infringed;
3. the infringer's behavior as a party to the litigation;
4. defendant's size and financial condition;
5. closeness of the case;
6. duration of defendant's misconduct;
7. remedial action by the defendant;
8. defendant's motivation for harm;
9. attempt to conceal misconduct.
http://acc-nyc.com/images/downloads/Full_Day_Presentations_/perkins_coie_commil_halo_presentation_for_acc_june_2017_6_11_17_final.pdf
Patents Not Sunk By Invalidation Of Some Claims
https://www.law360.com/articles/735974/patents-not-sunk-by-invalidation-of-some-claims-judge-says
ZW: Good point; Hope so; Corruption exists
Mentioned corruption before but discounted or dismissed by some.
I'm still a believer and if price drops from uninformed (panic) sellers, opportunity to increase position.
This was a temporary set-back.
Cisco, Arris and the 13 are monsters. Total market caps > $1 Trillion dollars.
It's David vs. Goliath. But David killed the beast.
We have the fact corruption has been demonstrated at the highest levels of government.
A jury, much like most informed Americans, are tired of all this Bovine Scatology.
I'm sure Whitman will expose ALL. Delay tactics, gambits and gamesmanship.
This may further infuriate the jury and award an even larger settlement.
Once again, all JMHO.
In Totality, Most claims Upheld; Progressing
Unless mistaken,
We hold that RPX has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–31 of the ’822 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
The ’822 patent is asserted in several cases in the District of Delaware. Pet. 2–3; Paper 4, 2–3; Paper 15, 2–3. In addition, we have
IPR2016-00234 Patent 7,941,822 B2 3 instituted inter partes review of claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 19, 20, 23, and 29 of the ’822 patent in IPR2016-01744.
http://www.merchantpostgrant.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/PTAB-05252017-RPX-7941822-IPR2016-00234.pdf
This brings us here where 8 of the 31 claims not patentable. UOIP still progressing.
These may have been overall supporting claims describing the patent in totality with additional detail, used to technically and legally describe the entire patent in complete and absolute detail.
This may have been a temporary momentum win for Cisco, but not much has changed. No need to interpret this out of proportion.
Intellectual property utility patents require them to be useful, novel (new) and non-obvious. Still got it.
Cisco, IPR2016-01889, Paper 10, slip op. at 13–14. In reaching this conclusion, we noted that the patents-at-issue “discuss[] RF channels in terms of frequency bands.” Id. at 10. Furthermore, in response to argument that CDMA channels are encompassed by the claims because the specification “teaches that both analog and digital signals can be sent using modulation carrier, such as in digital PCS and cellular telephone and that the cellular CDMA defines two types of channels—CDMA and code channels” (id. at 11 (internal quotation omitted)), we observed that “Petitioner does not explain why this would be the case and does not cite to any evidence” to support the conclusion that an ordinarily skilled artisan would understand “RF channel” to include CDMA and code channels (id.).
https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/ptab-filings%2FIPR2016-01744%2F28
My interpretation (for what it's worth) is similar to ice's.
As papa p wrote, need Arris's appeal to fail. I believe someone wrote, they were beyond their time to file.
Patents:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=7%2C941%2C822&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PTXT
All JMHO.
At least could buy ~.002-.0022
Gonna take news (or the anticipation of news) to get moving.
Exactly. 10-bagger on IPR win alone.
It's obvious some people do NOT fully comprehend or understand the tremendous upside and magnitude from here.
And once a whale gets involved, there's no telling.
It appears when BMIC not involved, for volume, it will get pricey!
Lastly (and hopefully), about at the critical junction where there's no turning back.
Great Points EB. Agree. Need News!!!
1M shares; Lose ~$2.5k or Make ~$200k+
Don't understand how anyone on this board doesn't buy or own at least 1M shares.
Worst = Lose All
Best = Make 200k to 1M+.
The cost-benefit is a chance of a lifetime.
Might be an inexpensive regret carry for life.
And could happen anytime or within a year or so.
Lastly, Carter was a money manager with an advisory group.
I'm sure has network of colleagues or associates willing to fund (if necessary) for %.
This will play out and be financed thru the end.
Plenty of exceptional DD supporting the facts.
All JMHO.
How's "6 Year Audits R Fun, Fun, Fun!"?
Gr8. Include the Cusip # & TA.
https://fintel.io/sm/us/uoip
http://www.ddninja.com/UOIP
Thank you for ALL your information,
Mr. IRS Auditor
"You woulda if ya coulda but since you haven't ya can't" HAVE ANY IMPACT.
Thank U ALL 4 Gr8 DD & "Insight" Crew.
Learned a lot about OTC BB stocks, even though rarely buy them.
This is one horse couldn't pass-up.
Now, need "Soon to be released positive ruling", news and patience.
In the meantime... "Relatable" tribute to TP (in a different cÖntext).
Called; Confirmed; Own Stock, Certificates Available.
If owns shares, can get stock certificates.
Exactly as Ram The Man, aka, Exhibit Y wrote.
Not keeping score, but it appears RAM Trumps all naysayers.
Each to his or her own.
Excellent, Outstanding, Superb, Marvelous, Fantastic, Awesome!!!
Thank you "Sir Mighty Ram"
How assured 13D Terms still valid?
From Schedule 13D.
The Certificate of Designations provides that on or after May 15, 2014, to the extent sufficient shares of Common Stock of UOIP are authorized, the Series AA Preferred Stock is convertible into the shares of UOIP’s fully diluted Common Stock of such number sufficient to provide the holders thereof, in the aggregate, ninety percent (90%) of all shares of Common Stock of UOIP on a fully diluted basis.
UnifiedOnline! converted its Series AA Preferred Stock into Common Stock on October 26, 2015 with an effective date of January 5, 2015. The purpose of the transaction reported above in this Item 4 is to exercise control over UOIP. After conversion, Unified Online! Owns 99% of the outstanding shares of UOIP.
Was this only for the entire acquisition of all IceWeb?
I do not understand how Carter can still control >= 90% of the company stock.
From last/final 10Q.
The number of shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $.001 par value, outstanding at February 15, 2016 was: 1,011,928,504
Where is the additional float coming from?
As you've written, 90% Carter controlled, but if do the math:
>> 1.9B * .9 = 1.71B, but float has to be greater than 190M shares.
Carter's control must be down to 70-75% or so with 500M+ float so don't follow all the legalese from 13D references.
If 200 of the 367 followers alone have 2M shares apiece, that's 400M. Many have multi-multi millions.
When have the opportunity, please explain and elaborate.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/UOIP/disclosure
Thank you Ram (Exh ¥), Scruff
I still believe UOIP is the greatest opportunity out there.
Why bother, but what the heck. It's Friday.
>> Who is being scammed since not taking from shareholder and giving to management?
-- I wrote, 95%+, but more like 98%+ of OTC are junk.
-- They are robbing Peter (shareholder) to pay Paul (management's lifestyle).
-- Most OTC's are so micro and undercapitalized, continual reverse splits.
-- This is the reason almost all MMs play to the short side.
-- Don't know % that become profitable going concern, but can't be high.
At least:
-- We're in and playing the game
-- We've had patent wins upheld and most importantly, have the patent(s).
-- We've got a 50-100+ bagger upside (1000+ for some); what invested downside
-- We're got the best attorney with more experience than RPX's years in business
-- We're happy and excited about our opportunity
-- We're not curious or jealous of those not invested
Warning is only from financials not being current. Doesn't matter, but admittedly, keeps the price down.
Happy Friday and President Day Longs.
Ono (Over and Out), Scruffer
Thank ýöû sexy. Awaiting positive news.
Furthermore, could be some profitable Cisco investor acquiring shares.
Probably just "Chump change" for them.
Really hoping Unified mentioned in next CSCO 10Q.
The stock needs a spark, new money, a catalyst, something +++++.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/858877/000085887717000019/a10qq1fy18.htm#sF92BE9A5562E523F82445D63F2810D9E
Someone mentioned noteholders or Carter too?
Something about converting existing remaining debt to shares.
Something about beneficial for Carter to buy anything under .0028. I think there were even calculations?
Thought read something like that in past.
It's anyone's guess (unless you're the bÜyer?).
Looks like dried-up and BMIC back @ .002 now.
TGIF.