You are correct. Position is given in range and bearing from datum, from the intersection of at least two lines of bearing, or an unambiguous fix from three range circles. Not "out there somewhere and maybe you can see it."

Good question. However, since the receiver has refused to keep us owners up to date, who knows?

Has anyone spoken to the receiver about what's going on with the cases?

Taking all that into account, the judge still decided we scum don't rate even a trial. Or, as they say in Latin, "ad fingarus absurdaris."

If I understand what is happening, the real deal is the appeal of the Markman in federal court. Cruising the web suggests we have a 50% or better chance of reversing Payne's ruling in federal court. I still do not understand what is happening re. Payne's summary judgment. If the Markman appeal supercedes it, fine, but does that mean the March jury selection et al goes away until some undefined future date? How does a SJ loss and a possible Markman appeal win go together? If the summary judgment is upheld, what does it matter if we win the Markman appeal?

IOW, even if the District SJ is upheld, a favorable Markman review for us means game on again?

If the SJ is upheld, how can we continue the case with a Markman review? TM has already petitioned the court to drop the jury trial. Would not a failure of the district court to review the SJ mean that the case is over?

Don't give-up. We have until next week to learn if our side will reply to the incomprehensible SJ. I do not believe Daic and the receiver will give-up their potential fortunes that easily.
As for money invested in CLYW, well, that's why they call it "investing" and not "savings." BTW, this is not the first time an investment of mine has gone to zero. One broker whose initials are DW sucked me into several imploding companies. As Spiderman might say, "With great risk comes great reward or great loss." My understanding of appealing an SJ indicates that success depends largely on additional expert testimony. Fourteen days is not much time to get this done.

I will be very surprised if CLYW/Daic doesn't file an appeal by the 30th. Daic and the lawyers stand to lose a fortune if this case is allowed to die. The BOC has evaporated since receivership so I do not think they are any longer a factor.

A question on procedure. Paine has recommended that this case be judged summarily by him for a dismissal as "no objective juror could ever find for the scum at CLYW." But to whom does he recommended it? If he does not have to power to end the case summarily, who does?

We'll know in another week. If we appeal, I hope it will also include mention of apparent judicial prejudice. "No reasonable juror could find that TM infringed"? WTH?

There are seven days left for us to appeal. Then, game over.

We'll all know in two weeks, won't we?

Daic stands to lose as much as $100 million if the judgment stands.

So? The judge doesn't care.

Having decided that CLYW has no case (after 4+ years and only six weeks from trial), the judge has said he will not reconsider his Markman decision. I agree with those who say his behavior in this case is troubling. I will be surprised if CLYW and Daic drop this. Look to see an appeal once we get expert witness depositions.

Opposition to a Summary Judgment

The party not moving for summary judgment must respond to the motion for summary judgment by filing an opposition. The non-moving party cannot rely on the allegations or denials it previously set forth in its pleadings. Generally, the non-moving party will file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment and attach affidavits and other evidence that set out specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial. In short, the opposing party must demonstrate issues are still open and debatable and therefore summary judgment cannot be granted.

If the opposing party does not respond, summary judgment may be entered against that party if appropriate.

However, if the opposing party can demonstrate by affidavit that due to specific circumstances it cannot present essential facts to justify its opposition, the court may deny the motion for summary judgment, order a continuance to allow the opposing part to obtain the necessary facts or issue any other just order.

Expert Insight

Affidavits are crucial evidence and should be attached to motions for summary judgments and the corresponding oppositions. Supporting or opposing affidavits must be made in good faith and based on personal knowledge. The facts set out in the affidavits must be admissible evidence and the person making the affidavit must also be competent to testify to the facts stated in the affidavit if required to do so at trial.

If a party submits an affidavits in bad faith or for the purposes of delaying the action, the submitting party will be required to pay the other party reasonable expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred as a result thereof.
=============================================================

I suspect this is underway.

Nice of the judge to become the jury as well, all in the interest of "reasonableness."

I note the report says he recommended the suit be tossed. Recommended to whom? Who decides this?

Still no response from CLYW/Daic.

Daic stands to win a fortune with this case. I doubt he'll fold now.

That's much better news, but it doesn't reduce the shock of today's events.

How? I assume the summary judgment means the March trial is canceled. So we then appeal to the feds about the Markman? And if we win, when and how will a new trial be set? How many more years from now for our next whack at it?

Apparently our side has second-rate lawyers. Daic must be chewing the curtains about now.

The Markman appeal has been denied per an earlier post.

We feel bad. But Daic loses a hundred million dollars. Bummer, man!

Timing is strange, isn't it? Six weeks before a trial on a suit filed in 2008 and after the judge had said that he really didn't understand the elements of the case. That it is so complicated that the average juror won't understand the case. So the trial must not be held because it is too confusing. Can someone help me with understanding this?

http://navlog.org/patent_1.html

I hope so. But won't that mean a new trial and a new date?

Daic is in this for tens of millions, perhaps a hundred million dollars. It's his to lose.

That's better news. My wife and I have just had an hour of cramps, trying to figure-out HTH the judge could have decided to deny us a jury trial. TM promised in writing not to steal our patent, and then did. This doesn't need a jury trial? However, if the second case is similar to the first, are we not still in the running, even if we have no trial date?

"A decision granting summary judgment can be appealed without delay."

It's all up to Daic. Would probably mean a new judge and a new trial (date).

This is interesting:

"If a trial could result in the jury (or judge in a bench trial) deciding in favor of the party opposing the motion, then summary judgment is inappropriate. A decision granting summary judgment can be appealed without delay."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment

So the judge has acted inappropriately?

1. Does this judgment apply to both of our cases?

2. Can a summary judgment be appealed?

Astonishing. He didn't even let us have our day in court.

I remain very puzzled at the apparent lack of interest in this case (cases?) among both the industry and the general public.

"T-Mobile will be filing a notice withdrawing its Motion to Dismiss in view of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint.

"The parties have met and conferred and have agreed to allow T-Mobile until February 8, 2013 to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint."

This is definite goodness for us.

A review of his posts reveals that he is one of the board's least optimistic posters.

Then again, Turrini has fled to Paraguay and is now running Paraguay Public Television. His claim to own 20% of Calypso has disappeared.

Thank you for taking the initiative, although what you report is not optimistic.

>>He was reluctant to answer some of my questions regarding the validity of the stock awarded by the BOD but corrected me when I said the judge had called them an 'illegitimate' board. He said the question of validity, and even the total number of shares outstanding would only be addressed if there were a settlement, because Calypso has no money at present.

My translation: millions of shares that the BOC gave to one another may have to be honored.

>>As for the amount of claims, he put the figure today at 'less than five million', a number I had to suggest for him to comment on. He said many people had suggested that we approach a major tech firm (Apple, Google, Sprint about selling 923, but he has had no offers or even bites, even from patent firms specializing in communications. He said he was sure TMobile has his number, but I was free to call them and give it to them if I wanted to spur settlement talks.

>>Finally he said he thinks the result of the trial will end this long drawn out affair one way or the other and we will either get a settlement or nothing. He did add that whenever a large corporation is looking at a court date, they worry.
Please don't ask any other questions as this is all I know from our conversation. FYI

My translation: we have, in his opinion, little chance of winning at trial. This is contra to the time and money Daic is putting into this effort unless he, too, sees a settlement as the only win.

I am surprised and disappointed that the guy appointed to "maximize the value of the shares" seems to have already decided we will lose.

Other interpretations are welcome.

It's the continued uncertainty of and when a resolution that really gets you.

I am confused by your post. Are you saying that we have already lost this case and we will have to appeal in 2013 to be heard by another court some more years down the road? I hope not.

How about being less cryptic?

Our suits/filings have long since passed the point where I can understand what is being argued.

Tick... tick... two months from today is jury selection...