What can i do for you....
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.
Rule 21. Writs of Mandamus and Prohibition, and Other Extraordinary Writs
(a) Mandamus or Prohibition to a Court: Petition, Filing, Service, and Docketing.
(1) A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus or prohibition directed to a court must file a petition with the circuit clerk with proof of service on all parties to the proceeding in the trial court. The party must also provide a copy to the trial-court judge. All parties to the proceeding in the trial court other than the petitioner are respondents for all purposes.
(2)(A) The petition must be titled “In re [name of petitioner].”
WORLDS INC,
(B) The petition must state:
(i) the relief sought;
For the PTAB TO PROVIDE A CLEAR GUIDELINE AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES SUFFICIENT GROUNDS TO ALLOW FOR DISCOVERY
(ii) the issues presented;
THE CAFC HAS HEARD THEM
(iii) the facts necessary to understand the issue presented by the petition; and
(iv) the reasons why the writ should issue.
A signed "CONTRACT" existed between the parties has been presented as prima facia evidence that a relationship existed between the parties and has been ignored where as in any aticle III court a judge based on such would allow for additional discovery/and/ where prima facia evidence is INDISPUTABLE exists the PTAB has failed to recognize it as such and asks the CFAC to direct the PTAB to respond as to WHAT constitutes as physical evidence in its venue
The physical prima faica evidence (the DEVPUB) is niot, was not in dispute here, only the interpretation if what it allowed for. So if AND THEY DID both parties agree there was an agreement and only the fact of what it allowed for was in dispute then why is it not enough for the PTAB to state on the grounds that it shows a relationship existed - then it should allow for discovery to CLARIFY what it meant -
NOT TO DENY ITS VERY EXISTENCE AS PROVEN
I know i'm mad i'm sorry to take up anyones time here, but i would now GLADLY wait another 6 months or a year to see the PTAB finally get its ass put in its place.
I would gladly contribute tot he legal fund Thom if your reading this, gladly, I am sure that 20 or 30 of us could kick in $1000.00 each to pay the lawyer to file this
I am SHOCKED at this Ruling. The PTAB i thought was trying to change, trying to get itself together. I guess not.
Worlds can file for an emergency writ of mandamus from the CAFC - but i would wait until the order from the PTAB regarding the estopple issue perhaps.
The CFAC CLEARLY wanted the ptab to clean their own mess up. The judges seemed to clearly see the DEV PUB agreement for what it was and had in different ways at different times made mention that there was no need to reach a high bar of privy positive relationship, that what was already in hand the DEV PUB was enough to show the some sort of relationship existed.
The reason for the writ i would think should be based on the fact that AGAIN Worlds was denied proper "STANDARD LAW" discovery because the PTAB is to DAMN busy and too DAMN high on its own power.
My motion would ask the court WHAT IS THE MINIMUM THRESHOLD of prima facia evidence FOR THE PTAB - to allow for additional discovery. If a signed documant is not enough to state that two parties know each other NOT TO MENTION A LEGAL REVIEW CLAUSE then what the hell is the minimum for the PTAB.
It seems there is no clear set forth rule, only what the mood of the PTAB is that day.
The judges that day KNEW that there was no higher bar to prove privy here and that there was enough with the DEVPUB to prove the minimum was met.
The PTAB is fighting back now against worlds for embarrassing the PTAB and against the CAFC.
The PTAB without being given specific exacting guidance will do what the hell it wants too.
I pray that Thom asks to go back right now to the PTAB.
Data and all,
I totally agree, i've been silenced as of late with all post re: DB or his lack there of. WDDD is so, so close to proving, Thom and all of us right for holding for so long.
I think if i were the attorneys for Bungie I would not have wanted to to need to return to my client and say - FYI - They re going to want communications emails, corporate minutes, and i would want personally i would want from bungie ALL - I MEAN ALL!! - emails recordings from before the letter was sent to activision re regarding destiny - I WOULD WANT all communications and corporate minutes where the ATVI Board member was present and would request if they when he was not present how did bungie convey those minutes to the ATVI board member sitting on the bungie board -
I Personally believe as a prior investigator this is the true smoking gun, no i am not an attorney, but i can follow this one very easily.
ALL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THAT BOARD MEMBER AND BUNGIE AND THAT BOARD MEMBER AND ATVI are needed. along with an email log for 100 emails before and after allowing to be sure that emails are not deleted.
I want the minutes of the bungie board meetings or recording - i want to know if this member ever showed or if the minutes were just forwarded to him
I want to see if ATVI and bungie legal ever spoke by phone or email, and the easist way to do that is to request the monthly legal billing to see when they spoke and they were billed by the legal teams for speaking to the others legal teams - OH You KNOW THEY DID! - 15 MINS HERE $300 10 minutes here $200 -
I mean if they ever spoke the reason would be listed, and EVEN if they white wash that, i jury would have to ask $500 an hour law firms if there was a potential litigation and both legal tams did speak it would show a gross misconduct by not talking about it.. IT IS JUST NOT POSSIBLE!
I want to depose the ATVI board member sitting on bungies board, will this guy out himself by saying he did not do his job, will bungie say they hid the information from him??? NO WAY that happened.
Again if bungie had to go back and tell the clients this is a possibility, it will not be pretty.
Well here is something i didn't know until 6 minutes ago.
I have been trying to figure out just why bungie has been
tooth an nail fighting this rather than coming to the table.
I mean ok, they could be at the table right now and we would
not know it, but generally there would be a rising in stock
consolidation if there was talks or if anything was moving in
a positive way.
Well.....
I was reading on the activision implosion, i had said 6 to 8 weeks ago
at $84 Atvi was a short play, just didn't realize how good it was... anyway...
Activisions release of Diablo mobile is a big loss for them and the
gamers are lighting torches and sharpening the pitch forks... But does anyone know who "DEVELOPED" the game for Activision... No its not Bungie that contract ran out, remember? -
The new developing partner for activision is NETEASE - Now why is that important boys n girls?
Well if anyone remembers any of my prior posts I had said that Bungie had issues i thought with trying to explain to its NEW PARTNER/INVESTOR NETEASE what was happening in losing at the CAFC.
Yes Boys an Girls, Activsion fired Bungie. - Bungie needed a infusion of cash - Bungie signed with NETEASE for $110,000,000.00 million dollars - Activision needed a developer, Activision hired NETEASE who gave it to its NEW PARTNER Bungie to help develop...
So now, Activision is stell dealing with bungie but at a long arms length, NETEASE is now in the middle between ATVI an Bungie all while the actual IP is still being used.
Now here is where things get interesting
NETEASE wanted to use Bungie for a new game possibly "MATTER"
Bungie was aware for sure of the IP Issue - So the second largest gaming MFG in china NETEASE with obvious USA based assets is now part of the IP list of infrigers and now my bigger question.....
Id D2 (destiney 2) n Possibly D3 if they are based on the stolen IP even if the patents ran out, if we see any documentation of any type prior to the expiration of the patents that they Bungie internally thought about D2 or D3 can we by the same way look for royalties for games built upon the stolen IP as well?
BTW NETEASE is traded under NTES an asset in the US.
NETEASE is working as a cash in partner with bungie
ATVI is a cash in partner with..... wait for it.. NETEASE
NETEASE must be asking some questions now on the Diablo IP, The future now Destiny 2/3, and Activision must be saying how are you going to build :MATTER: the game on what prior IP base.
AND i will give you one better, NETEASE wanted into the US market so bad, ok, fine, but now id we can find where NETEASE IN CHINA... used stolen IP we can now go after them in the US not CHINA - and now that they have US Assets in the US that could be profitable as well.
BTW NETEASE has a book worth of approx $25 billion could go as high as 30 billion depending on the stock price being raised to buy could go from about $225 to $250 a share to $300..
Thoughts anyone?
And now........discuss...
Mad... Your out of line.
You've been here a while but not nearly as long as most of us.
We have allocated, added, added more, and more.
Most of us are just in a hold pattern as discussed to many times already.
You need to realize that you currently (and its totally your right) have zero skin in the game. Your looking in. We are not. Your stalking a forum, lurking and going on and on, which to some degree is ok, but to say and i am paraphrasing here "well if its so hot n undervalued why arn't you - meaning anyone one of us who have sat on this for 7 years or so maybe more i qm thinking i'd have to look. Too say the above is rude and baiting.
It doesn't mean we do not have other stocks, investments and businesses to deal with daily as i am sure you do. But its like saying for 23 hours and 59 minutes a day that the clock will never make it to the 24th hour. Ok so it hasn't gotten there yet, ok we're waiting. Ok go do your thing and please stop trying to teach everyone one else and explain to everyone else how great you do your thing - its enough already. How many stocks do you do this with or is our forum the lucky one.
Madprophet
Latest Posts Boards Posted On Boards Moderated ZERO About My Stocks (12)
Board Last Post Posts
Worlds Inc (WDDD) 11/02/2018 12:18:00 AM 1,591
Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB)11/01/2018 05:14:32 PM 12
BioTime, Inc. (BTX) 11/01/2018 04:55:02 PM 5
UnifiedOnline Inc. (UOIP) 09/11/2018 10:53:12 AM 1
Opko Health Inc (OPK) 09/10/2018 11:40:29 AM 1
Aphria Inc. (APHA) 09/06/2018 06:17:10 PM 3
Orocobre Limited (OROCF) 08/03/2018 02:24:54 PM 2
Gladstone Investment(GAIN 08/02/2018 01:46:48 PM 21
Vet Online Suppl (VTNL) 07/03/2018 01:34:29 PM 39
Gifa Inc. (GIFX) 06/24/2018 05:27:14 PM 9
Invitae Corp. (NVTA) 05/21/2018 02:42:37 PM 1
InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) 04/16/2018 03:08:57 PM 3
Umbra Applied Tech(UATG) 04/06/2018 02:30:22 AM 1
Midas Gold Corp. (MDRPF) 01/29/2018 01:54:34 PM 1
6 MONTHS 99 POSTS TO 12 OTHER STOCK FORUMS AVG 1 EVERY 2 DAYS
6 MONTHS 1500 POSTS TO WDDD AVG 250 MONTH 8 PER DAY
If this was a women you would have been arrested for stalking...
Just slow it down a bit, your coming off rude and condescending.
Bungie can nit say there was no privy -
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE - I SAY IT - I GUARANTEE IT
Activision put a Activision employee on the Bungie board !
Eyes n Ears were put on Bungies board by activision for
exactly this type of issue, so that activision would know
when something was afoot.
Unless, the email servers are wiped, the employee
payroll servers are wiped, the board minutes showing
who was there. or all the minutes from attorneys to
atvi board or ceo are wiped...its a done deal they are just trying
to find the least costly way out.
i mean come on, the issue of privy is done and they know it
the contract was an amazing find without a doubt and the door
that it opened is catastrophic to both atvi and bungie.
and honestly if bungie does not settle now, they are in big trouble
because they can leave activision in the wind as no contract exists
now - but bungies big problem could be the new partner that infused
money, i hope bungies new 110 million dollar partner doesn't get spooked
Data, Exactly.
There seems to be a disconnect from those not realizing exactly what was before the CAFC and what was not.
At no time had WDDD risked the prior won (and it is a huge win)from the "they will not survive the PTAB death squad" claims.
No matter what we go back to Judge Casper I would assume late spring 2019 will get a date and due to its age it would be sooner than later.
I do find it amusing what some call hyperbole but do not actually read everything. The changes at the USPTO Stated that they really really want to keep the same "judges" on the same case. Ok so they do not wish to release the date, ok, maybe shes pregnant, maybe retiring, i will keep watching to see if she is on any other matters for winter, spring 2019 if she is then whats the excuse... lol
An i have to say, while yes the stock is down, its easy to point to the obvious, and if your in this for a few pennies, if you have nothing else in your life to do but follow one stock that your not in, to follow a stock while you could be paying attention to your own investments seems inefficient at best, its like that old girlfriend you went out with once and will not go away, but stalks you about whats wrong with everyone else.
I would like to know if white or alpha have any skin in ATVI or WDDD i mean i would put good money they have no patents themselves, perhaps one could have a trademark... hmmm ...maybe... but thats another story.
With so many other thing to do, could white coal or alpha tell me how, out of 1000 other penny stocks, they found this one, which they have no money in, but are here, thank "god" to keep us informed about how we spend our money.
Do you guys really think that this is our only investment? do they think we do not have families, investments, businesses, cash on hand, property, and/or PATENTS WHICH I HAPPEN TO HAVE 3, and that this is a PENNY stock WITH risk which we ALL know could go to zero....
We are all grown men and women here. Who elected you guys our teachers - why do you troll a penny stock board - unless you get paid, by bungie, atvi, or board. What went wrong that you need to feel superior, what is wrong, i'm here for you, i'm listening, let me help.....
I mean you could be some guy just sitting back in Miami in a business that teaches people how to run their business and get paid for it.
Now that would be someone i could listen too, if i needed that.
Alpha - even for you that was bone headed.
The Actual date of a hearing: Not Provided
The Actual deadline for electronic filing of answers: Not Provided
The Actual reason of conflict: Not Provided
I will though watch now to see if she is around during the provided time frame on other cases. If she is, then, PTAB really is changing some things up. - If not - say pregnancy or perhaps she knows she is stepping down after the first of the year for another job offer, etc, then ok...
But to call out about DD here - you were just wrong.
Spin it like a top - an you will. But without a date known for a physical hearing, or if this will be done only with filings and to know in a case with HUGE implications and they know it. -
1- Complete vacate,
2- Guidance provided
3- Statement saying "Sufficient" evidence, etc
4- Leaving the door open to WDDD to go back should it be necessary
I think it was a slap down, I think there was a conversation after the NEW Director read the CAFC reversal and then reading the original transcript of the oral hearing and or the opinion and had a come to Jesus with (non article III court) (judge?) (board member) Begley.
Something tells me, that the LAST thing the new director will want is this case again going back to the CAFC - because i think the CAFC was overly open to let the PTAB clean up its own mess, but hinted i think that if the PTAB doesn't clean up its own mess, the CAFC will.
Anyway JMHO
And btw - my apologies to all, i never looked at the hierarchy of MRMD. for some reason in the spin off of Worlds/MRMD i thought it was a Worlds Inc spin off that Thom was the CEO and had 100% control of, i did not do my DD and sorry about the dividend question last week.
I find it interesting that without a date available that Begely who authored for the group of 3 and as i saw first hand was the bigger problem of the three is not available for the panel of which a date is yet to be listed
Is it because of internals; where if you get slapped down by the CAFC and author for the the group, you sit out the new hearing?
Is it because she has decided she will not be available?
Is it because the new shake up of the PTAB and the re-leveling of the field back to where it should be
or something else, I mean to know for sure your not going to be around for a date yet to be determined and its the original opinion / author...
Just throwing it out there
Unless once again i missed something
ABCD you completely missed my point.
I was asking about OUR SHARES OF MRMD those do not have an avg of .25 over the last 30 days.
I am saying or thought i said, that we own (Worlds Owns) about 5 mil shares of MRMD - If MRMD changed our shares to say class A or other (not common) and WDDD could be able to receive say a .02 or .05 dividend on those 5 mil of shares - that alone could fund WDDD for the foreseeable future WITHOUT having WDDD sell ANY MRMD shares.
I mean MRMD is what now worth 400 mill +/- so - a little back to Worlds could certainly do a lot of good to day to day operations without any pain or loss to WDDD.
Therefor
We still keep the shares
We do not have to sell at a loss MRMD shares
We do not need additional funding from 3rd party
We do not need to ever dilute between now and say the next 6 for PTAB, 2-3 months decision, 2-3 months to get on Judge Caspers docket and then a month for court plus a week / jury / etc etc - again the aforementioned is worse case with shares of course rising but we get all the best of all the scenarios
Whatever i was just thinking a little, perhaps that was my problem
Data or others who may have spoken with Worlds.
Its, late as you can see from my post. Cnat sleep don't feel well, so excuse me if this has been discussed or is just not possible.
My question is this:
Is it possible, just possible that without having to sell our MRMD
stock shares, could
1- WDDD's holding be converted to a different series an isolated series A or whatever, so that;
2 if really needed. With say (i know my number is off) but say 5 Million shares, ok. with a .05 cent dividend on those shares call them original founder type shares, series A, etc. (this is an area i am not familiar with but) with say with 5 mil shares WDDD owns could a tiny dividend from MRMD to WDDD shares create the next 12 months of financing / operations funding without the need to sell our shares or diluting shares.
@ .05 per mil its $50k x say 5 (for 5 mil) = $250k Its like an interest free loan to WDDD without losing worth in shares,
IDK just spit balling
MAD AND KID
Guys i see your side, and truly your not doing anything other than spin your wheels. 6 ATTORNEYS canread the same document and have 6 opinions. Ok you have your look and while yes possible could go back to CFAC after PTAB it is in no way a BACKTRACK.
Here is why guys
FIRST
We won't get past Judge Casper no way - We Did
We won't have enough financing to get through this.. We did
We wont survive the PTAB death squad.. we did
Can we last without toxic funding - past PTAB Thom took care of that.
Will WIFI one go our way setting a new precedent.. nah... Yup we got it
We could/would/might get everything thrown out at the CAFC.. WE Won
----
Now we have a CFAC ruling that sets an actual guidance which i wrote about the COURT uses the term a "pre existing ""RELATIONSHIP"" the PTAB HAS to abide by the guidance. It does not say anything other than a FLEXIBLE APPROACH and PRACTICABLE - MAD / KID what more do you want. Its all done except crossing t's dotting I's.... Bungie is in trouble... all the naysayer's are out of ammo...
NOW YES...is it POSSIBLE....POSSIBLE..that the PTAB "COULD" go against the CAFC and say that a contract between the parties is not a reasonable, practicable, flexible look at what a contract is... ok, Could they look and say that a SITTING BOARD MEMBER does not provide a DIRECT information conduit between the parties - I mean its why he was there NO???? -
So yes Kid, Yes Mad could It have to go to the CAFC again, technically possibly sure... likely.... well i would not want MAD position sitting on the sidelines when something happens here i'll tell you that, because all the money, all the free shares and the 50% day trade short time hold tax free share won't make up for a gap up one morning....
So ok, MAD/KID anything is possible... But if you read the way above issues we got through... all the DAMN ODDS stacked against us and NOW - WITH where we are now, with the PTAB here now being told EXCEPT FOR THE 3 patents not appealed to be discussed ITS ALL DOWN HILL NOW GUYS... seriously why are you trying to piss on the parade, ok your out now and you have your reason, but enough. We are grown men and women here who are doing what we feel is right. no ra ra, no other i can do what i want... we get it,,, but honestly... unless i break my neck again or someone needs a kidney you couldn't pry these shares from me.... no way or how and AND
IF you were watching prior to the CAFC ruling the shares were being held, THERE IS NO WAY your going to convince anyone... PLEASE - PLEASE
Lets just get back to other thoughts and considerations... this is going noplace...
Data I want to know if we may be on the same page sir.
1- The estoppel issue on the reverse, am i correct that its only on the 3 previously not appealed patents Judge Prost seemed to bring that up early on- i don't remember the numbers of those three.
and if so
It be secondary to the RPI issue of course, because if the RPI pans out as the language shows it should,
We note, however, that we have issued opinions since the Board issued its final written decisions that clarify the meaning of the term “real party in interest” in the context of § 315(b). See Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp., 897 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (explaining that determining whether a party is a real party in interest “demands a flexible approach that takes into account both equitable and practical considerations, with an eye toward determining whether the non-party is a clear beneficiary that has a preexisting, established relationship with the petitioner”);
2- Were in a better leverage position possibly prior to PTAB discovery
3- Is it possible, just possible that Bungie takes Mr. Kidren's PR release as an olive branch to come tot he table?
Cut n Paste answers if easier, i am just curious if i am close here.
TRADETRAK
That is why DC Casper and discovery now is weighted heavier here. Even though we will get discovery, the estoppel was on the 3 IPRs not heard if i am correct, the others are not part of that. I think if i remember correctly - someone correct me if wrong - i think it was on the 3 not appealed. But that does not stop DC from now allowing discovery especially now that we know from Cafc THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER AGREEMENT and board members, etc.
enjoy the NFL folks...
bye
The CAFC decision was made. Yes. But it is not automatic. If Bungie settles then the PTAB case dies. If Bungie who brought the IPR decides to not file, Worlds can, and it will. But it was guidance. Not sent to a lower Article III actual court. My friends remember its a BOARD not a lower court that has to accept and put on its own docket.
Alot can happen between now and the filings. We filed with the CFAC Bungie filed with the PTAB.
Right now the STAY ORDER was with the DC PTAB cannot direct the DC to the mens room never mind what they can or can not hear.
The stay order was until the CFAC decision. Period. It was there was no other, lets let everything else play out. The PTAB played out, we won, not as much as we wanted but we won.
WE -WE... asked for the CFAC - sorry but its how it went. Now we are in a legal position of in limbo... UNLESS----UNLESS bungie quickly files to get back in, which i HIGHLY doubt. They have a legal spanking coming and right now the attorneys have to explain to the client ummm, you can't wait them out financially because WDDD has a spin off worth 400 million. AND they are now gonna ask for a laundry list of discovery including board member info, contracts, agreements, bank account co mingle of regular day to day operations and legal being paid, emails, memos, board meeting minutes, letters, for both Bungie and Activision and JDOE.
I was thinking those Bungie could have a way out, which would be this.
ATVI is gonna say the contract says you provide IP legal work cleared and hold us harmless. Bungie could now that they were cut loose by ATVI say Our IP was yes in house, BUT YOU ACTIVISION knew there was an IP issue from back when WORLDS first told you, why did you ALLOW us to use what you knew was in dispute, you knew it was a risk and LURED us into a contract knowing.... That would be a defense. but only against ATVI.
I think Bungie if smart would now wish to be a Developer and Partner with WORLDS. If Thom and SG could bring them in as a partner saying hey, ATVI duped you, Lured you to do our dirty work while they made money and should have told you. Lets be friends... It would be a tremendous blow to ATVI. ATVI would be in a bad corner of
1- 53 claims coming back against them in all.
2- Even at court WDDD could say and 6 were 100% said to have complete validity, the jury would have no choice but to rule in our favor.
3- ATVI allowed by contract other companies (BUNGIE) to use the tech without telling them.
4- Thom ASKED THEM TO LICENSE and was declined and abused WDDD.
5- Here is what WDDD had to do to survive to get to court, toxic funding, shareholer dilution, etc CFAC, PTAB, - THATS TREBLE DAMAGES
6- Local Bostom Co. v Goliath - ouch !
AS far as DC goes - Just the ask by WORLDS to the DC Judge for a hearing on discovery would now have ATVI getting into discussion of $$$ or buyout - in my opinion -
With Bungie not under thumb/contract and bungie needing and getting a cash in flux from NETEASE of 110 million giving them a valuation of what 1 billion, 1.5... ok, think all the tech being in question going back 10 years is what they want at stake based on someone in discovery finding 1 email, 1 memo, 1 letter, or the deposition of what the board member was there to do.... i would not want to risk my entire company on that out there.... Bungie has to settle...
If Bungie settles, worlds provides a universal release, worlds gains income $$+ and provides worlds all documents, minutes, etc without a court fight...
Maybe i am dreaming, maybe, But its legal, its possible, and with the minds at play here, the attorneys AND ESPECIALLY Thom - there is no way they have not thought this through already and are not 5 steps past me.
anyway JMHO
Correct to all who responded, your closer in line with the actual legal landscape.
Right now WDDD has to figure out their own PTAB response of course and what i am not sure about is, will this be only a filing requesting information or will it be back in DC. I hope for it to happen in DC in front of the panel. Reason is, i think there would be great value to hear the arguments in person pleading for less discovery and the reason for this but not that.
But again here is the thing, and no i am not an attorney but i have been in the subpoena business, well, was a while ago and i can tell you that right now this very minute the district court has the weight not the PTAB.
The PTAB is not automated here, WDDD has to move to get heard and for what, meaning perhaps discovery has changed i know for a FACT mine has and here is why. I would have to find the exact minutes in the CAFC Oral but the Bungie attorney alludes to "other agreements or contracts" something to that affect. I would like to see that/those.
Further more in a bit of research i find where there were a couple of small issues of emplyment court case and IP where bungie was defending and activision was mentioned 1 was over music for destiny 1 was for employment issues by two others and activision was mentioned, now not that being mentioned is a big thing but all i want to know is was there ANY ---ANY- conversation at ANYTIME between Bungie and ATVI about those cases... this would have been a conduit of information = privy.
If you read my prior emails on the board member information from activison and bungie... ALL that could be discussed now that we have it on the federal record CAFC AND PTAB there is NO Way Judge Casper would not allow for it. Judges do want a complete record. - I will be curious to hear if we do not temporarily move forward in district solely as in using the court docket for information. But what the hell do i know...
The PR will say standard stuff, it will not say if there are talks with bungie, it will not say so many things it will say they are on the way back to the PTAB, that they 100% succeed in completely invalidating the PTAB decision and look forward to finally getting the discovery they wanted a year ago. But i think thay can get 2 bites at this apple, they should now ask the PTAB to squeeze bungie and the District court to squeeze ATVI which when the information is compared better match up.
The PR will look forward to say we are a good investment type talk, but nothing more than we won, they lost, they need to carry the burden and we will be vigorous in the pursuit of information here on out.
AND now that i think about it, i would consider, hmmmm, i would consider asking to depose ASAP the bungie board member A S A P. while the PTAB discovery is in the works and hopefully the DC information subpoenas would work. A three pronged legal attack - Its the rarity with that much available information with this large of a cashe of information out there that you do not find things to use, rare if at all.
And if Thom is listening, i would not charge to serve said subpoenas, free of charge buddy, put me in coach, i'm ready to play lol.
So much incorrect information here.
1- Avg time for re-review by PTAB after CAFC 6 months so March 2019
2- No i am sorry to say yes we technically have all patents back but we cannot go back to district court because you do not know which claims you are suing for and what weight each one deserves to only have to remove it from consideration 6 months later on
3- Casper is not going to let her docket get used up and then find out were back to the TOP LEVEL PTAB again which will provide guidance in the case
4- This is not going back and forth as someone said before to PTAB to CAFC to PTAB back to CAFC, Not happening. PTAB now knows worlds is not going away, some defendants do not have the money to defend. So now the PTAB and we may get new Judges will decide on collateral estoppel - On three IPRs
CAFC is sending back with overall guidance based on prior precedent and the PTAB will allow discovery.
5- HERE IS THE BIG ONE THOUGH.
We do not need the PTAB now for discovery. Because we agreed with ATVI to hold the district court case until the CFAC decision, we now have that decision. We are now free to use the docket number for the district court case and if you read my last 2 postings you can now use a subpoena to ask for everything you want in an information subpoena or subpoena duces tecum - WE DO NOT NEED THE PTAB now we are free from that encumbrance.
As a former asset locator, PI i can tell you i would be shocked to find out they are not considering it as we speak.
6- The big questions should all focus on ALL information around the Bungie board meeting minutes and if they do not ask for those, then they CAN 100% POSITIVELY ASK FOR ACTIVISIONS ! and anything in the board minutes relating to Bungie or the board member they had sit on Bungies board would have to be supplied. Plus any electronic, memos, emails, notes, files, questions, paperwork, etc
7- They can depose that individual
8- They can now being free of the CFAC ask for information without the PTAB.
9- I think Bungie is trying to find a way to settle this now, they are in trouble here. They should want to settle this for pennies now and let activision hang by themselves.
10- MY REASONS FOR 9 AND 1O- I found 2 other cases where Bungie and ATVI WERE somewhat involved in employee suits, IP Suit, and that alone shows they were dealing closer together than make use a game put it in a box and send it to us and we will send it. No. They cannot make this go away. If bungie can make a deal that says ok ok we will pull the IPRs we will pay you less not 200 million but 25 million and we will provide all relevant information that would be bungies best bet, they are off the hook and activision now has to fight it alone.
boy would that be fun to watch, then Activision would make a play to buy out either worlds and sue back Bungie - or Activision buys out Bungie to stop them from leaving the IPR dead. In which we can then tell the PTAB to drop dead and use Caspers court for discovery and the PTAB CAN F off.
Its how i see it.
Guys n Girls give Thom a break!
He has attorneys from two law firms all day
Taking calls from investors
Taking calls from PR firm
The vacate is what id important - jeez read it
The vacate is with - WITH instruction and Guidance and the PTAB
knows how the landscape has changed with RPI and discovery.
You all just want a jackpot arm to feed you all at once
He's not hiding anything relax.
If your not happy and all nervous, sell buy back later on, right?
or are you worried you'll miss the boat?
Just give him through the PR firm a day or so.
This PR release is extremely important lets get it right
not fast.
I believe everything will hinge on the information about the board member
and his conduit on ANY--------ANY------ANY information over 10 years that he provided between the boards of both companies as soon as that information is asked for and if he ever as a CONDUIT for the parties did so - its game over there was privy, therefor case closed. PTAB got spanked again and this time they know if we go back because they will not let us ask for something we can go right back to the CAfC - THIS IS GOOD PEOPLE.
GIVE Thom a few days here and let him pop a bottle of champagne
Please read to the bottom its written in a specific order.
My years as a PI and Asset locator come Back to me…
The Subpoena is mightier than the sword my friends.
As I have said here is what is possible.
Follow below my bouncing subpoena ball questions.
Obviously some of the questions below would be considered compounded and would need to be inquired upon differently but I am grouping for the readers here.
1. How much did ATVI invest originally with Bungie.
2. Was there future amounts paid to Bungie.
3. Were those amounts deposited into one account or many accounts
and in many which accounts were they deposited into.
4. On what date was a Activision Board member accepted by Bungie to
sit on the Bungie board.
5. What was the board members name Hereafter know as board member
J.Doe or Doe
6. Was this individual Doe the only one elected by Bungie for
Activision.
7. Was the ATVI board member Doe privy to ALL board meetings
8. Were all outside 3rd party lawsuits discussed at board meetings
in front of Doe
9. Did Doe have a Bungie email.
10. Was the Activision letter referring to Destiny shown to all board
members
11. Were minutes of all board meeting recorded by mechanical means
(audio) or written
12. Did Doe have access to any meeting minutes missed
13. Is there a record of board meetings for the prior 10 years
14. Is there a written record or audio for those meeting
15. Did the board direct monies from ATVI into a general account to
clear
16. Did the board direct monies from a general account to a
legal/council account
17. Was a retainer, invoice or any amount written from any account
for the litigation from any of the aforementioned accounts and if
so how much for
18. Was the amount paid shown on corporate tax returns
19. Did Activision pay any amounts directly to Bungie for litigation
in ANY other cases.
20. Did Activision EVER PAY any amount to Bungie for ANY litigation
IN ANY other case or case review
21. Did the board members not Doe direct legal council to institute
the IPR WITH the Doe at the same meeting of the board
22. Did Doe vote on the issue or offer a positive move forward is
warranted recorded at the time or comment on such.
23. Did Doe have an active Bungie email i.e Doe@Bungie.net
24. Can you produce all emails to, from, cc, bcc for Doe
25. Is there an employment file for Doe
26. Does that employment file contain a application for employment
27. Is there a contract for employment between Bungie and Doe
28. Did ATVI or any party on behalf of ATVI legal, employee, patent
ever email Bungie about any question to make sure the IP was free
from litigation such as the case at hand with Worlds
29. If bungie is not privy with ATVI does, has bungie ever send any
emails to ATVI in house or other legal council for ATVI?
Activision
30. Did J. Doe Ever work for ATVI
31. From what date to what date
32. Was Doe ever a board member for ATVI
33. Who did Doe report directly too daily
34. Who did Doe report directly to that was on the ATVI board
35. Did doe have an ATVI Email account
36. How long has or did Doe work with ATVI
37. What was Doe’s duties at the company
38. Was there a memo, letter, board meeting minutes or meeting
whereas Doe’s duties on the Bungie board was discussed and agreed
to.
39. DID DOE EVER REPORT BUNGIE BOARD MEETING ISSUES WITH ANYONE AT
ATVI
40. If Doe did discuss Bungie board meetings with whom did he or she
41. Where those minutes, emails information sent electronically
42. Did Doe ever sit In on any board meeting permanently or temp for
any special meeting
43. Did Doe ever discuss Bungie meetings with ATVI board
44. Was there any emails, memos, letters, discussions from the legal
department to or from anyone with ATVI regarding any IP
litigation on ANY case
45. Was there any emails, memos, letters, discussions from the legal
department to or from anyone with ATVI regarding any IP
litigation regarding the cancelling of the 10 year old contract
with Bungie
46. When Bungie paid its legal retainer, invoices or other legal fee
for each of the last 10 years did any of those payments come from
any account that original or later monies were paid by ATVI were
deposited into
47. If ANY payments from ATVI into a Bungie account was used to pay
legal fees was there any attempt and if so to depurate legal
payments from casual day to day payments to others in a way to
show monies were not co-mingled
48. Was there ever a statement made by J Doe at any board meeting
regarding and LEGAL issues including IP or any other
49. Did bungie ever have any contract, agreement, paper, electronic
document in which parties guiding ATVI and Bungie exist
50. Has an ATVI representative ever discussed in person,
electronically, memo, contract or in any other way using any
instrument human or materially any legal case regarding any 3rd
party not Worlds Inc. at any time during the past 10 years or
during the contract years between ATVI and Bungie.
Lastly
to Bungie at any meeting was it brought to J Doe to EVER during any board meeting or individual meeting, phone call, text, email, memo or other conveyance conduit of information do bring ANY kind of information to Activision to ask a question and to receive feedback on ANY issue during the 10 year contract and if so what was such information
Lastly
to Activision at any meeting was it brought to J Doe to EVER during any board meeting or individual meeting, phone call, text email, memo or other conveyance conduit of information do bring ANY kind of information to Activision to ask a question and to receive feedback on ANY issue during the 10 year contract and if so what was such information
See my friends these are a quick top 50
information subpoena" questions - My Subpoena Duces Tecum would be based upon the information based on the information subpoena.
I brought many an investigation to a complete halt and to a very nicely structured settlement.
This is nothing short of a win for WORLDS i could only hope that Thom alludes to this type of warfare.
FOLKS IF.........IF any 4 of the items in any combination exists or happened its game over. If Bungie who now has no contract and now recently just got a 100 million for a small piece of their company from NETEASE does not need ATVI anymore way decide to either, concede, remove the IPR or settle with a small licence issue to boot - ATVI would LOSE their minds!!!.
Anyway just my opinion with 20 + years of experience
Hi Data good to see you around again, sorry though it is under these circumstances.
I have been mending a broken neck, Happened shortly after CAFC DC day back up in NJ in May.
It seems if i am not around here everything starts going crazy.
White Coal If you do not own the stock - why are you bothering people who have disposable income, Do you also stand outside the Lamborghini dealership complaining they make noise use to much gas and are to expensive.
Your hilarious Sir,
You make me laugh every time at your ""DD"" remarks because you worry about all of us and what we do with our money.
The day i borrow $5 from you Coal- or you pay my $22K a year property tax bill you can then guide me, until then all you do is make us laugh.
Your making an A** of yourself here.
Find another stock to make your .05 cents per word to bash a stock.
CAFC out, 1 decision, not ours, maybe tomorrow
I am sorry but i am not so sure about that.
If remand it will be with instructions, the instructions will set precedent in that a fishing expedition is one thing, but when there is some sort of actual factual proof of a relationship thats something else. AND unless i am the only one here. They allude to at least 2 other documents, one the contract we now of, one was another agreement and there has to be one for the board member and they quoted someplace in the oral about another doc. I want those, I want the emails prior to the filing date by bungie, i want the server logs, the email serial numbers from the router, i want the actual minutes from the board meetings from the day after we sued ATVI, I want to see copies of checks to see if any point to legal, i want the interoffice at bungie and ATVI from the day we sued.
AND----------AND--- they still have to rule on the time bar
AND ---------AND----they still have to rule on contract law of privy
AND----------AND----they still have to rule on the PTAB shifting burden of proof to us - which is against the USPTO guidelines.
Now if they rule against all of the above and still remand, then yes it will be another 6 to 8 months.
But they have to answer all of the above,
IF ANY OF THE ABOVE IS FOUND IN OUR FAVOR THEN GAME OVER WE GET ALL THE CLAIMS BACK.
GAME OVER BUNGIE - NO EXTRA PLAY - TILT - OVER
Unless someone has another thought - thats just mine
5 out today, again were not one of them...
oh well tomorrow is another day
and yes they were all heard after ours
some by weeks some a month or more....
i believe they are crossing the t's and
dotting all the i's -
If its taking this long there must have
been some deep thought and a bit of a
tug of war... but i truly do not see how
we come out of this losing...
GLTA
Ok, seeing as we all have time on our hands how about this brain teaser
just to see how many opinions we can get on this one.
Fact:
Bungie was a private company from 1991 until 2000
Bungie was acquired by Microsoft in 2007
Sometime in this time line Thom Kidrin goes to ATVI and say you're using our patents.
Bungie started working on the HALO franchise for Microsoft.
In 2007 Bungie divested from Microsoft
Shortly thereafter Bungie entered into a 10 year CONTRACT with ATVI
In 2017 end of, Bungie did not re up with ATVI
In 2018 Bungie goes looking and finds Net ease which invests 100 million
With the above in place.
Microsoft starts Halo, Halo is a brought to and for Microsoft - Assuming that Microsoft is not stupid, and they get a hold harmless, patent clear, liability clear software clauses in the contract.
Bungie not just for destiny but for damages for Halo 10 billion in sales plus is in serious danger here.
Think of this, they sold Microsoft a free and clear title but it wasn't. They were infringing early as well.
Now here is where it gets interesting.
Microsoft holds up a hold harmless clause, Microsoft say hey they said it was bungies own software we had no idea that they used Worlds platform.
Worlds says, well we told ATVI they were infringing and they knew it as we told them in person and by written letter. Which they ignored.
Microsoft even though they made 10 billion in sale or more in halo and halo related says don't look at us, look at bungie.
Now Bungie ends up on the hook for the damages that Microsoft may have to pay- ehh i doubt it.
More likely the problem of infringement reverses to bungie for the claims against all the halo games.
Bungie could be on the hook for the HALO claims and licenses at 5% of 10 billion its 500 million - Bungie has a net worth as a private company if NETEASE paid say 100 million for a say 5% stake in bungie i use that as a base because NETEASE got a board member on bungies board. that puts bungie at say 2 billion in worth i think its high but ok.
Still how would bungie pay that amount of 500 million minimum a 1/4 of the company net worth.
Plus of course the employees who went out on their own and have studios, and without of course other Micro solft, disney, EA etc etc... i know that is all....in the realm of who knows, but the bungie contract issue not renewing after 10 years i think says something here folks.
I think Bungie is on the hook for a lot more than anyone thought, never mind the software from HALO 1 on down the line is still sold to today from Microsoft, the will owe something i am sure as a we should have done more DD.
Wouldn't it be nice to owns shares in Bungie too as a perpetual income seeing as it would be shares or possible bankruptcy...
I would like to see yes some money from say ATVI.. and the rest in shares from the infringers as then WORLDS becomes the largest in total share holder in the industry holding shares of each company we sue as compensation.
Just a though boys n girls
I think the second case today has a much more specific look at ours:
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/18-1688.Opinion.8-27-2018.pdf
Page 5 shows where attorneys are no substitute for actual evidence
and the mid bottom of the second paragraph "where there is two views of substantial evidence the CAFC has the right to review "meaning boys n girls - like our contract AND where bungies OWN attorneys allude to there being at least one more contract and an agreement, you can hear it in the audio they say it themselves and if true they could have brought those before the court and didn't.
Todays decisions out - none of them ours..
lets see what tomorrow brings same bat time same bat channel
5 CFAC Opinions out today
We are not one, i doubt anything else for today
Tomorrow is another day
Long Live the Longs !!
8 opinions today ALL precedential
JUST AN FYI
We are close folks, we are close, as much as my family i pray for all of yours and Thom's....
Quilt
I am sorry i do not agree with the legal fees moving forward.
1st
The agreement for law form 1 was for Worlds v Activision only, please remember why we are at the CAFC its because we then added Destiny. No other actors were added to this case, it was not Worlds V Activision, Microsoft, Sega, etc etc etc. Activision only. I see NO REASON WHATSOEVER to pay a firm 1/3 once all courts are affirmed in place etc. It would be any other firm needed on a retainer / by the hour to only go after with court ammo in hand. Now once the infringer decides to say no, then yes file it with sussman et all, to fight it and file for costs to be paid by infringer. I am hoping that we also get costs back it seams about 30 to 40% of case relating to PTAB/USPTO ISSUES do get costs back for attorney fees.
2nd
Once we make have a decision with the PTAB locked down and the CAFC 3 things will happen.
1- Activision i do not think a jury will let a local new england company get robbed by a big bad from California, especially when.... Mr. Kidrin tried to get ATVI to license this and the toxic funding will be brought up as too why we could not develop while we were under funded due to these issues, etc etc,
2-
Other smaller developers will come to the table and say ok, rather than going to court to no avail, and a pay out plus, lets just provide a slightly higher royalty...
3-
Worlds would then set up a press release saying with the District court decision is hand in Boston, With THE PTAB in hand, with the CAFC in hand
a press release will be sent out stating ball will start rolling against other infringers
4- Mr. Kidrin within i think 90 days will look to uplist and if, IF the stock price is not high enough yet he could leverage MRMD perhaps a reverse buy out to combine companies to stack the price higher, but i see that as a 10% - rather i believe that the price will start a drastic rise. He really for the better of all wants the uplist.
5- lastly i'll combine the final two here with infringers starting to get the cash flow and an uplisting coming I do not see how he will not move to divest WORLDS to other IP expand on and move to blockchain or other.
If you do not HAVE to take the cash out, this could provide a long ride up folks, imagine 2% of the entire industry along with an upfront payment of hundreds of thousands to millions -
and if the above does not frost your flakes - why would ATVIVISION completely cash heavy or Microsoft or facebook now into gaming on their site - why would one of them not offer a buy out of cash and stock of something like $7 a share to leverage all the above or more...
AND AN aside, we do have a PTAB/USPTO issue to get to yet regarding later filed patents and longevity of others to deal with - I would not say as others have that - the patents are all dead now at all.
anyway I'm holding 6+ years as well, could have pulled cash out long ago - but i believe here -
JMHO FOLKS
Issues to be decided:
I am sorry but the quote by someone that these judges are against or do not normally set precedent - is really not 100 percent accurate about 40 percent in recent history has set precedent - because of the issue with the PTAB 97& RATE OF KILLING patents
-
1- As chief Justice Prost said, Why is the issue "CONTROL:- This bar of Control is too high the issue of control is actually much less - its having privy, it is having input, it is about discussion between the parties and party B taking its queue frm party A - this was brought up by the court -
I believe this is how it will go -
1- They will say that Improper (due to the PTABs own exact words in the opinion) unduly put thr burdens of proff on WORLDS
2- I believe they will say that the matter of the contract is key in that it should beyond a minimum that there was at least shown that there should have allowed discovery and not just accept the notice of RPI signed by the attorneys as proof - evidence to the PTAB
3- I believe they will because of wifi one and oil states will now set a guidance on the 12 month rule stating that even though the guidance manual for the USPTO says 12 months and that the USPTO head can adjust that at will, they will say that there needs to be a clear line, 12 months plus holiday, act of god, weeksends etc, but not months.
4- They will split the patents saying the 3 not made party to the CFAC will be left null and rule on the 3 listed - this was an issue that the attorney should have handled better.
5- They will address the fact that a board member was put on the board on bungie to THIS IS IMPORTANT - To be the go between - between the parties and if minutes or recordings or texts or emails were allowed to be gotten during discovery it would have shown that.
6- They will rule that bungie did not provide evidence to balance out the contract and that contrary to bungies argument that it is neutral evidence they will rule that bungie had the chance AND - AND that the PTAB SHOULD HAVE ASKED if there was.
7- They will remand with guidence to rule on the 3 patents before the CFAC at a minimum or if they find bungie was RPI then all 6 because would valid as it would not get to the PTAB and it would not have gotten tot he cafc
8 They will SPECIFICALLY send this back with judgment in favor so as to send this NON artical III AGENCY notice that the CAFC will be ruling in favor if they do not (the ptab) follow there own rules as laid out in the procedure / guidelines that everyone is supposed to know to properly file.
THE CAFC DOES NOT want this kind of crap to keep being on the docket- this agency if you look at the docket for the CAFC if more then 65% of their docket, they need to start sending messages that the CAFC has the power not the agency.
9 Which brings me to 9 - they will rule agqinst us on the matter of did the PTAB have jurisdiction - i believe that - but - they will say that they MUST follow the guidelines and AND AND... must allow discovery - especially when the minimum of evidence under contract law is found or known -
At some point the CAFC WILL HAVE TO RULE MAYBE OUR CASE MAYBE NOT - that discovery for the most basic of things - contracts, an allowance to at the PTAB allow for examination at the PTAB or by deposition to ask questions at the least.
JMO
go re listen to the judges again the recording is still on the CAFC site.
Well Here's my two cents.
Judge Prost on at least 3 occasions asked specifically
to our attorney. Why he was arguing such a high level
/ high bar of privity. Where she believed and i could
be very wrong here, that the bar too show more than a
casual/casual/close link between the parties was not as
high as was being made out by both sides, but especially
ours. It was our only potential error in the oral argument
it seemed she was baiting him to to argue it more.
Personally and i truly like our council, i think he beleives
that the contract as evidence itself with is subsections
show that causal relationship.
Our case compared to the recent ruling is different in that
the PTAB was offered prima facia evidence of an actual
contract that they themselves did not disclose because
they didn't have too, because the PTAB was playing judge
jury executioner and did not expect Thom to come up with
the funds to fight this and the attorneys to take it on.
If you read the prior ruling of the recent decision its
clear they are going to send back those cases that still
need discovery procedures. OURS though i think they will
find that
1- the PTAB error ed in ignoring a contract coupled
with and this is important -
2- that there was a sitting board
member as well on the Bungle board.
There was CLEAR intent here to defraud Worlds and to use
the PTAB as the accomplice by almost never allowing any
discovery in cases.
This is the type of case that the CAFC can use as a prime example
to show the PTAB and the USPTO to say "hey there was a contract,
hey there was a sitting paid board member" We let you go in
the ruling for wifi saying you can exist - but you have to
act like a impartial board and not a patent killing entity.
The above then coupled with the fact that Bungle came in
how late like 2 months (can someone look that up please)
late on top of it, yes the 12 months is a guideline not law
but there has to be a reasonable close out, whats next 13 monnths
if so, why not 13 months 5 days, then 13 months 3 weeks or
14 months, where does it end.
The CFAC is a busy lot, and they are getting jammed up with
PTAB stuff, this in my opinion is the perfect case to in ONE
basket be able to say, enough you may ignore maybe one thing
but not RPI plus Board member plus months over plus no argument
at orals for contract.
Its too much - its too obvious that there
was something going on, perhaps not specifically against worlds
but certainly in wanting to open the free market by killing
patents that are owned by small companies.
Personally with the way the PTAB had been, has been and with
us did act, i am personally SHOCKED they allowed the claims they
did, it was almost like it was, hey we are obviously screwing
them over left and right lets throw them a bone maybe the two
sides settle, maybe it helped them sleep better IDK.
Just my opinion
IMHO
COMPLETE VACATE no chance for cheap shares again, but if i am wrong, ok, fine, then perhaps i will have a chance to really be able to avg down more - We have MRMD shares to use, no more toxic funding, and in ANY CASE - worse case scenario We go back to Casper and say hey Judge you were right - we have 6 claims upheld lets get a jury in here and go to work. -
This was as expected: Sure it would have been nice if the SC threw it out, but in the real world as i last wrote, the SC was not gonna throw out the PTAB / IPR and then have everything land on its own desk, this was not gonna happen.
As i had said and was backed up in the decision OUR issue was the PTAB did not follow its own guidelines and DID NOT ALLOW "due process" read below;
“We emphasize the narrowness of our holding”, taking pains to note that they’re not deciding the validity all aspects of the process, nor due process or retroactivity, leaving open the possibility of additional lines of defense for patent holders.
I see the CFAC going the same way, My money where my mouth is -
I see the ruling in our favor, i see the either remand being with CFAC guidance saying that while we find that the 12 month Bungie allowance to enjoin was allowed to be bent, but to with EVIDENCE (the contract) there seems to be no minimum bar or guidelines provided as to due process of evidence even when confronted with something such as a contract between parties such should be the minimum bar.
AS FOR A CAFC Decission
It would go as follows;
1-
As was found in Oil states and others that the IPR does not need to be reviewed and adjudicated by an article iii court, the rules and guidelines provided by the PTAB should be followed and where not followed there should be a hearing as to why.
2- As for discovery, as that Oil States did not define and has left open the door for issues to be brought before the SC or CFAC on grounds of lack of DUE PROCESS.
3- Where here in Worlds V Bungie where exists such a high bar was set with a minimum (the contract) was provided and ignored by the PTAB and as such has caused the Plaintiff to take on toxic type funding, loss of time due to these proceeding, the court finds for Worlds AND further directs the PTAB to review its discovery process allowing for such by setting some guideline to address the discovery process during the accelerated PTAB process.
4- Patent holders should be allowed to defend the patent awarded by the government as such the plaintiffs bringing the issue to the PTAB against a patent holder should be allowed the same due process of discovery.
5- I would say they would say that, Oil States says your allowed to exist PTAB, but the ruling does not say you can just make up rules as you go along, you have rules, follow them, you cannot in one case provide discovery and another not, you cannot stay someone from filing a IPR in one case and allow someone to file in another after the 12 month expiration.
Think of like this, They heard Oil states and said ok, you can stay in business, you filter out a lot prior crap from getting to us at the CAFC level, ok. BUT if the contract that was found in this case was not at the least a ""MINIMUM"" to allow the patent holder to ask and be allowed discovery, what could be? How much more in your "COURT" in your IPR hearings is required to allow discovery to move forward? what is YOUR standard to allow discovery. Arbitrary allowance is not a threshold.
Based on the above i think they hold for Thom and Us, JMHO
Just because i have a few minutes, let me answer a few things brought up.
Alpha, You disregarded a little something important, Bungies own attorney ON THE RECORD said their is another contract, now yes you can say it a contract to shovel snow, i get it, but that is at least more towards the issue of a relationship between the two companies, now before you answer that also remember this.
Part of the briefing -not the oral- the paper record provided to the CAFC was that there sits or did sit n=at the time on the bungie board an activision board member.....and..and... don't respond just yet... and
Part of the briefing it was Judge O'Malley who stated that the bar IS NOT control, its privity. see a prior post and read WIFI ONE for yourself, or look for yourself for the legal meaning of privity, where there is a relationship between the parties.
Ruling in Worlds favor does nothing for the CAFC except,
1- Spank the PTAB, puts them in place by saying if you do not follow your own rules we will act
2- Bungie by its own admission of other contracts now exposes WHY bungie did not offer a corporate officer with knowledge a signed declaration to the PTAB stating that this was all for nothing, because they know their was more business dealings between the parties, THEY KNEW IT!.. and now you, we, the judges all know it too.
3- Now if all the above you say is nonsense which is your right to do so ok, but answer me this please.
An activision board member, someone paid by activision also sits/sat at the time on bungies board, most likely being compensated by money, stock, or a free cup of coffee, this is factual.
What do you think the email chain from activision to bungie wanting a member of their (ATVI's) board to sit and watch and listen and report back to ATVI will say.
"hi this is fred at activision i have a friend that needs a job" No, not likely.
The email, the contract, the request to put him on their (Bungies) board was to know what was going on.... now here is the kicker... (thanks for reading this far).. the kicker is so that, legal issues before the bungie board, issues about game, code, release issues could be "BY CONTRACT" could be cancelled by ATVI if their is an issue, that is more than privity, closer to control for sure.
So i ask you, even you, have to admit that there is privity, a relationship 2 contracts at the minimum and a board member, and....AND... had the right (the control) to kill the project if it was not up to ATVI's standard. They ATVI HAD/HAS the right to kill a project. So it's control.
With that said, and judge o malley saying Control is not the bar to meet here, it privity, why would they waste the time letting the PTAB have another go at this, especially knowing that they (the CAFC) is going to with OIL STATES provide guidance narrowing what the PTAB can and cannot do from here on out.
And yes, i forgot that the PTAB ignored their own guidelines shifting the burden back to Worlds
It does nothing to the CAFC to cut bungie loose after all this.
To say that well its not bungies fault what the PTAB did, is ridiculous in light of the fact that, their own attorney said there is another contract at the minimum, which is why bungie knew they could NOT provide a more concrete explanation of the relationship, they couldn't without lying on the record in Federal Court.
There is just too much for them to ignore, In my opinion of course.
Judge O'malley was hung up 4 times on the wording "in control".
Was Activision in control.
She asked repeatedly why is the threshold "control".
As such she cited another case which i can not remember.
So i went back to WIFI One to read it again.
In WIFI-One the term control was not used but rather the more liberal term of - "privity".
The legal definition of "privity" is below:
n. contact, connection or mutual interest between parties. The term is particularly important in the law of contracts, which requires that there be "privity" if one party to a contract can enforce the contract by a lawsuit against the other party.
Privity - Legal Dictionary | Law.com
In WIFI-One the "In Privity" threshold was used as the bar.
I just do not see how with one contract in hand and another one at the minimum admitted too by Bungies own attorney, plus an Activision board member on the board of Bungie does not meet this threshold in the minimum.
I am sure i will get jumped on for control v privity, but its not me, i toook it from the record of WIFI-One and the Worlds V Bungie -
I can not see the bar of privity used in one and not the other, not at this level of proceedings.
Can i weigh in here. A small fact, at least i think. I had to listen 3 x to be sure i heard it. Bungies attorney, on the record when asked about the actual contract admitted it was yes, between the parties, yes it mentioned "products". But more importantly he then says about the relationship between bungie and ATVI he says and i quote " that's another contract". He actually does state it. He actually does admit there is at the least another contract for other work, meaning that there is more than a one time casual relationship.
Who knows what that one says, who knows if there are other contracts prior to or after those. I can say this as well. These judges are not stupid. But they do not need to upend the entire appeals court for the next 10 years either.
I think these judges know the WIFI 1 was a warning to the PTAB, I think thy know that there will be information in OIL STATES possibly narrowing the PTAB powers and that the worlds decision will bridge a gap, perhaps saying you, the board had an opportunity to play by your own rules, this is what happens when you don't, we (CAFC) do and becuase there was a true reason to allow, because they didn't, and because they did not time bari think they will themselves time bar bungie and let activision fight is own fight.
Bungie losing here DOES NOTHING to anybody else's case, time bar has been in existence, we are not asking for anything new to be written, and that the PTAB forced worlds to carry the proof burden, the reason for discovery is already there in the PTABS guidelines, we are not looking for anything new to be written.
I see it as they will time bar bungie on the BASIS OF THE PTAB did not follow three not one but three of their own guidelines forcing them to realize that they better shape up or ship out. its the easiest way to make this right, put the PTAB on notice and it really changes nothing for all the other cases before them as we don't need to set any new precedents. JMHO
Good Morning just got back front 8 hour airline delay, so i'm tired but truly look at this in the bigger picture and not a why did it not go up .3 cents today point of view.
1. We did not get a negative ruling from the bench as was proffered by some
2. Alice, etc was never raised into question
3. No MAYER
4. No Dyk
5. No Newman
6. No Wallach.
7. O'MALLEY Herself asked how is this fair to worlds
8. O Malley hereself asked why does it have to rise to the level of control as it only needs to be a causal - i am interpreting here - but basically it doesn't mean full control over Bungie needed.
9. Chief Justice Prost asked - Bungle Why not provide supporting documentation to the PTAB in support of the RPI? Bungle had nothing.
10. Taranto asked about the contract wording of "products" not just Destiny as listed.
11 Taranto asked about doesn't ATVI have control over if a game requires more work, can't ATVI send it back, If they don't like it they can scrap it...
12. Chief Justice Prost asked about why was the burden unfairly shifted Against the PTABS own rules/procedure book of the burden being on Worlds instead of Bungle where it belonged.
14. Last thing on this, I do not think they want the flood gates opening up more work for themselves on the WIFI one issue, I think they will smack the PTAB down hard on basically saying if we give you PTAB a short leash to act like an article 111 court, than act like it. You were handed a contract that at the very least showed a causal relationship, you must allow discovery. Knowing if they do not allow WDDD to go on a bit of a fishing expedition now, it will end up back at the CAFC.
I would like to just see the subpoena ask for all emails, records and video, audio, transcripts of every type of board meeting where the ACTIVISION board member was there to see what or how he drove anything, that would be an interesting read for sure.
* Granted, it would have been nice to have Chen, but really is this the sticking point here.
I wonder if seeing the record of Worlds v Bungle that the same Justices if En banc for oil use in formulating Oil states that they see even here how the PTAB acts like an article 111 But really has no consistency.
I do not see alot more that could have gone WORLDS/Mr. Kidrin'S way today. Those n this for a 20 cent/ 50 cent move are not looking long here at all. Just my opinion. I'm 500k shares pre R/S at .42 DO THAT MATH !
- Hind Sight is always 20/20 I believed then, i believe still. Just would like to looK down one day and see it at $2.50 break even OR $4.00 (.80 Cents pre R/S) an make something
I would rather wait 6 more months and go back with more claims...
Anyway hope this stays up, i have been silenced alot recently.
GLTA
JJ got it pretty close... But as I had stated and was correct back in 2016 .. there's one way to listen and another to see body language and hear how things are said. There seems to be a feeling that they k ow Wi-Fi one is gonna make more work for them and they do not wish to add to it... Personally...they do not believe bungies not being a related party.. o malley even stated that it's a PTAB issue of control but the cafc is not bound by that... In whole the cafc is not buying what the ptab did.. they unfairly put burden on world's.. they had it seemed according to how what they were asking that there was prima facia evidence to really move forward with allowing world's to get discovery.... And they did not buy that bungie just answered the ptab with a simple nah... We don't Kno who Activision is... I personally believe this will come down to one word... "Products". The contract at hand doesn't specify "Destiny" as bungie argued.. the hold harmless by activision says products... I think they will narrow the decision to when there is a causal relationship such as an ongoing agreement for services that allows the second party to require changes or the second party can cancel the project then there is sufficient cause to allow discovery.. never mind that bungie has a board member from Activision on it's own board... So 1 minimum we get remanded to ptab.. 2 they buy the issue without remand and say there is enough to time bat..3.. they make law.. saying ptab errored should have not shifted burden.. thereby not allowing wddd to a fair trial and rule there was causal control afforded by contract and throw bungie out.. in any case not one word was mentioned about existing claims.. we will be going back to Boston it's just a matter of how many claims..
No dyk.. no wallach.. no mayer.. Happy for MrThom kidrin... Enjoy all
Oh I forgot to ask this last week, i was thinking in between prototyping some molds for a product.
I wonder, i am hoping to find out in person in March but, maybe DATA OR Patent plays could answer now.
Any Chinese games, MMO or other that are played on line (out of the country) but not really listed in our prior lists of US Based companies, do any of them, correction, DID any of them use the tech, if any did even if they are not now,
see because if they did use it when band width was slower, but now they use any type of different tech, it was originally based on the original tech, even if they grew out of it, they couldn't if they originally didnt use the original stolen tech to make money to grow
Its kind of like in the legal world called fruit from the forbidden tree if you did A wrong in the beginning, then c, d, h, k x,y an z are connected back to A and there for can not be separated from each other.
I know they are US patents, there was no early PCT, but if the games were played in the US, or used any US Servers i was just thinking ....
Pal, nothing and nobody here is going to be able to convince you that its pejorative at best. So i am not gonna waste a breath, But i will say this, you buy as low as you can and sell as high as you can, what does it make you.. Me, anyone else?
If there lost, you would have said they were stupid for risking, if they doubled there money you would complain too. Ive seen guys like this before, more for them the hell with anyone else.
When they invested in the money the stock was .2 at what amount do you deem appropriate that they should make with their money.
If it only went to .05 they still would have doubled, too much for you too. I am sure it is.
I am not kissing anyone's ass, i stated facts, some people do not like them, i do though. I have 3 patents currently i am in this for various reasons, i believe in this stock and the CEO, I am post AIA in my intellectual property, i wanted to see this through for alot of reasons.
But i am curious, if you can keep it civil if not i'll just put you on ignore like others. How much should i make on my investment, how much are you allowed to make, or others here. Are we bad too for trying to buy as low as possible and sell later to help or families out.
my numbers have been out there my friend, my money was where my mounth was at .42 cents... over half million shares, you do the math, i'm not kissing ass, i'm watching it.
Call the warrant holder what ever pleases you, you'll never change your mind, its what makes us all different, just not in a good way. But are you more upset someone had almost a million dollars to put into a death spiral or are you upset that you don't.
A million (875k) i'm rounding folks. on a speculative at best. how dare you, they threw a life vest when others went floating by...
This is why its been 9 months since i posted last... i'm gonna go back to my cave now...