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.
Etrade is .0485
Asia Bioplastics Outlook 2013
I wonder if CERP is attending. Couldn't find a list of attendees.
http://greenbuildingelements.com/2013/02/09/asia-bioplastics-outlook-2013/
Be very careful with Sierra World. The site is about her (she's hot).
They pump every stock there is. They are not in the market.
Just read their disclaimer. It would be nice but don;t trust them.
CERP will do fine.
DISCLAIMER
This blog is for fictional and entertainment purposes only! Sierra World Equity Review and it's publisher, do not accept payment to feature or recommend any stock. Nobody knows about our stock picks before they are published live on the Blog. We are not affiliated with any other web sites, executives, owners, brokers, promoters, analysts, or trading groups.The publisher is not a registered investment advisor. Readers and subscribers should not view information found within this domain as offering personalized, legal, tax, accounting, stock or investment-related advice. Viewpoints, information, entertainment and fictional posts presented within this blog are our own, accuracy is not guaranteed.
That was probably a print from earlier this morning. Only 200 shares.
AH volume only 34,000, nothing compared to 42 million traded today.
Current AH pps is 1.54.
Those with audio can you please post any updates and info.
tia
Thanks. Mines up now. Went down for about 10 min. Technology.
Is anyone having a problem getting into ETrade?
tia
Interesting. In the cc when they were discussing suing in Europe they mentioned the ease of the court system in Germany. He just mentioned it while talking about the U.K. Hint to us?
All in all it was a good cc. Pretty much as expected, maybe a little better.
There was no mention of delay. It's SOP to have motions from both parties post trial. As they said there could be a ruling in a few weeks, or months we don't know.
*$60 mil cash and no debt.
*ZTE suit in the works. Experienced legal team in U.K.
*New deal in Italy for Facetones.
*Nice new patents.
*Loss from Q2 to Q3 down 83%. Included the $100k from AOL.
*More $$ to be booked from Google will bring a positive EPS.
*New patents from Spectrum(?) for "placing Ads" on websites. How many
websites is that?
*Wouldn't answer about MSFT of Yahoo - expected. Read between the
lines.
There's probably a few more. I heard more positives and can't remember
a negative.
Microsoft and Google financials could surface at trial
ReutersReuters – 1 hour 53 minutes ago
(Reuters) - Microsoft and Google's Motorola Mobility unit squared off on Tuesday at a trial with strategic implications for the smartphone patent wars and which could reveal financial information the two companies usually keep under wraps.
The proceeding in a Seattle federal court will determine how much of a royalty Microsoft Corp should pay Google Inc for a license to some of Motorola's patents. Google bought Motorola for $12.5 billion, partly for its library of communications patents.
If U.S. District Judge James Robart decides Google deserves only a small royalty, then its Motorola patents would be a weaker bargaining chip for Google to negotiate licensing deals with rivals.
Apple Inc and Microsoft have been litigating in courts around the world against Google and partners like Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, which use the Android operating system on their mobile devices.
Apple contends that Android is basically a copy of its iOS smartphone software, and Microsoft holds patents that it contends cover a number of Android features.
Motorola had sought up to $4 billion a year for its wireless and video patents, while Microsoft argues its rival deserves just over $1 million a year. A federal judge in Wisconsin last week threw out a similar case brought by Apple against Google just before trial.
In court on Tuesday Microsoft called Jon DeVaan, a veteran software manager in the Windows division, as its first witness. He said Motorola's wireless and video patents at issue covered only a small part of the overall Windows architecture.
During the run-up to trial in Seattle, both Microsoft and Google asked Robart to keep secret a range of financial details about the two companies, including licensing deals and sales revenue projections. Google requested that Robart clear the courtroom when witnesses discuss those details.
However, in an order on Monday, Robart rejected that request. The public will not be able to view the documents describing patent deals or company sales during trial, Robart ruled, but testimony will be in open court.
"If a witness discloses pertinent terms, rates or payments, such information will necessarily be made public," the judge wrote.
Additionally, any documents the judge relies on for his final opinion will be disclosed, Robart wrote on Monday.
Before trial began on Tuesday, Robart said in court that he wanted to take the most "expansive" interpretation of the public's right to know. Several outside companies besides Microsoft and Motorola, like Research in Motion Inc, have also asked him to keep secret their royalty deals.
Robart said he would consider a request to refer to those third party companies by code names, known only to the lawyers and the judge.
The case in U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington is Microsoft Corp. vs. Motorola Inc., 10-cv-1823.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-google-financials-could-surface-004659475.html
What are the thoughts here regarding pps going into the cc and after?
Obviously factors have to be built into what "May" be said on the cc.
We know earnings aren't going to make this run. I'm suspecting, just speculation as everything else is, that they will be very vague about any case questions. probably just say we can't comment at this time due to motions and rulings to come.
But, what do I know.
gla
Got ya. Misread your post and agree.
This is very normal for lawyers to prepare the order they want approved by the judge. The judge can sign it as is, make changes or deny. It just shows what they want and hope they get it.
These are from Friday and were posted here over the weekend. They are just motions filed - nothing else.
11/8/2012 Market Closed
VRNG's NASDAQ Last Sale
4.77 1.27 36.28%
NLS Volume
5,372,223
Previous Close
$ 3.5
Today's High
$ 4.7700
Today's Low
$ 3.2601
52 Wk High
$ 5.73
52 Wk Low
$ .68
NASDAQ Official Price
Open Price/Date
$ 3.45
Nov 09, 2012
Close Price/Date
$ 3.40
Nov 09, 2012
1y Target Est
N/A
Rate Vringo, Inc.
Community Rating:
100% bullish of 5 ratings
Rate it
NASDAQ Last Sale (NLS)
for the last five trades
NLS
Time (ET) NLS
Price NLS
Share Volume
16:00:00 $ 3.40 100
15:59:54 $ 3.392 2,000
15:59:51 $ 3.40 100
15:59:50 $ 3.40 100
15:59:50 $ 3.40 100
SEE ALL THE TRADES
The last five trades feature is not available during the Pre-Market, nor the After Hours. Visit the respective link for the trading information in that session.
Learn more about real time quotes.
Current Chart: Intraday | 5 day | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | More Charting
It also shows 11/8, not 11/9. Doesn't match up with any trading history for either day.
Second Quarter Highlights and Subsequent Events
June 15: Received Markman Memorandum Opinion & Order ruling in wholly-owned subsidiary I/P Engine's case against Google, AOL, IAC, Target and Gannett; jury trial scheduled to begin on October 16 in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Virginia.
June 15: Signed agreement to develop Facetonesâ„¢ for Nokia Asha Touch mobile phones.
June 25: Added to the Russell Microcap Index.
July 19: Completed merger with Innovate/Protect.
July 20: ZTE began shipping handsets to Europe preloaded with Facetonesâ„¢.
August 10: Completed financing of $31.2 million, with approximately 90% placed with three institutional investors.
August 10: Acquired over 500 patents and patent applications from Nokia covering telecom infrastructure.
Operating Results
As of the close of business on August 13, Vringo had $15.3 million of cash on hand. After giving effect to the repayment of approximately $3.2 million of debt, Vringo will have $12.1 million of cash on hand.
Net loss was $5.17 million, mainly attributed to a non-cash, non-operating expense which totaled approximately $3.1 million, recorded in connection with a periodic valuation of warrants, classified as long term derivative instruments, as well as $600 thousand in one-time expenses related to the merger with Innovate/Protect.
Mobile application revenue remained relatively flat at approximately $100 thousand for the two first consecutive quarters of 2012. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, revenue decreased approximately 45% to $206 thousand compared to $374 thousand for the six months ended June 30, 2011. This decrease was primarily due to regulatory changes in Malaysia and the lack of one-time fee revenue in the first half of the year.
Operating loss for the second quarter decreased by 26% to $2.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2012 as compared to $2.7 million in the previous quarter. This reflects primarily a combination of operational cost synergies, partly offset by M&A expenses related to completing the transaction with Innovate/Protect.
On a per share basis, net loss fell by 22% to a loss of $0.36 per basic and diluted share in the second quarter of 2012 compared to the loss of $0.46 per basic and diluted share for the previous quarter, mostly as an increase in the weighted average number of shares, and decrease in operating loss.
Thanks for the clarification LOL. Read it again and you're right.
LOL, just found this and was wondering if I'm reading it right. Nit sure if this is a state by state thing but it appears post verdict interviews are allowed. Again, I'm not a lawyer and just wondering.
Post-Verdict Interviews
Debriefing the actual trial jurors following a verdict provides valuable insight in terms of the rationale underlying their decisions. Counsel can also gain valuable insight with regard to the development of the case via our conducting of individual juror interviews. More specifically, post-trial interviews permit the counsel to view the trial process from the jurors' point of view, highlighting which arguments and themes jurors found most persuasive, identifying the most and least convincing witness testimony and providing useful evaluations of exhibits. We recommend completing these individual interviews (which are done via telephone or in-person) immediately after the jurors reach a verdict (and, of course, following the judge's approval), as their ability to recall important details declines dramatically more than a week or two after trial.
Jury Reconvenings
If you wish to glean post-verdict feedback via in-person, group interviews with the jurors, we can conduct a jury reconvening. Typically, a reconvening takes place within a few days of the conclusion of trial – bearing in mind, that the jurors' ability to recall specifics diminishes as the days pass. As in the case of the post-verdict interviews, this debriefing provides valuable insight in terms of the rationale underlying jurors' decisions, including their reactions to key arguments, witness testimony and demonstratives. The reconvening is moderated by an experienced LI consultant who works with the trial team to develop a list of questions and follow-up probes to be explored with the jurors. Those jurors who agree to participate are typically reconvened for an evening where they are led in a plenary debriefing (versus one by one) which also sheds light upon the group's dynamics (i.e., interactions among jurors, leadership style and impact of the presiding juror).
http://www.litigationinsights.com/mobile/Jury_Post-Trial.html
Nov 14 is the EARNINGS CONFERENCE CALL. Easy to check.
Here's a decent writeup about VRNG v ZTE.
What Is Behind Vringo's Lawsuit Against ZTE?
Vringo (VRNG) announced yesterday that it has filed a lawsuit in the British Patents Court against ZTE's (ZTCOF.PK) U.K. unit for allegedly infringing on 3 patents whose rights are held by Vringo. The patents in question are related to mobile phones and infrastructure gear. These are among the 500 patents Vringo recently acquired from Nokia (NOK), as detailed in this SEC 8-K filing from September 8.
Vringo has undertaken to fight a slew of lawsuits against various giant technology (and other) companies on patent infringement questions. Many of these are patents it has acquired from other companies. For example, some search advertising related patents that it alleges Google (GOOG) and AOL (AOL) infringe on are from the now-obsolete Lycos, a search engine company from the 1990s. In all, it has waged wars against IAC (IACI), Target (TGT), Gannett (GCI), AOL, and Google. As I write this, one such lawsuit against Google is about to be decided in American courts. In light of this background, the ZTE case is important not just for itself, but also as to how the results might be used against other mobile hardware companies. Since many of these patents are standards-essential patents that need a FRAND license, Vringo can easily find other mobile hardware manufacturers to sue.
The Patents In Question:
ZTE has allegedly infringed upon these 3 European Patents, Nos. EP1212919, EP1166589 and EP1808029. I looked through the Espacenet database to locate the actual patents. Here's a brief summary of what they entail.
Patent No EP1212919
This patent was granted to Ahmavaara Kalle of Nokia Corp. with effect from 08.09.2010 and titled "Relocation in a Communication System." The status of the patent is "in force."
The field of the invention relates to relocation in a communication system, and in particular, but not exclusively, to relocation of a protocol termination point. The invention can apply, among other things, to gateway GPRS supporting node (GGSN) and gateway mobile switching center (GSMC), which are essential to developing mobile communication hardware.
Patent No EP1166589
Inventor here was Benoist Sebire of Nokia, and the patent titled "Rotating Synchronization Channel (SCH) Transmission" was granted on 18.06.2008 and is still in force.
The field of the invention relates to radio telelphones and mobile stations capable of operating with digital downlink (forward) transmission from a plurality of base stations. It presents a method of transmitting information to a mobile station irrespective of traffic slots assigned to it.
Patent No EP1808029
This one was granted on 17.06.2009 to Antti Pitkamaki of Nokia, titled "Inter-system hand-over of a Mobile terminal Operable with a First and a Second Radio Access Network."
Here, the field of invention relates to mobile originating service-based inter-system (in particular, terminal-oriented) handover having improved characteristics from previous models.
All three patents form part of the backbone of Nokia's mobile hardware technology, and are considered essential technology for most of today's mobile hardware. Although Vringo has acquired them from Nokia in September this year, the relevant patent documents at the PTO are yet to be updated with assignee information.
More....
http://seekingalpha.com/article/913101-what-is-behind-vringo-s-lawsuit-against-zte
LOL, sorry I can't PM back.
I haven't seen any numbers yet. Not sure if they have been disclosed yet. I'll have to do more DD on it.
As regards your previous quote on the cc Nov 14 I would like to correct it. The cc call on this coming Weds, Nov 14, is the after earnings call. It does not have to do with the current, or future suits. Maybe something will come out during the Q&A.
GL to all of us.
The Nov. 14th CC, was Vringo's way of saying, pay us what we want or we will appeal the laches, reassert the triple infringement and start proceedings in Europe.
The ZTE suit is about Nokia patents. It does not prove out that Vringo can get patents approved in Europe. The Nokia patents are foreign patents, not U.S. patents. That's why the suit was filed in the U.K.
Vringo sues ZTE in the UK using patents it recently acquired from Nokia
http://www.newshour24.com/2012/10/08/21928-Vringo-sues-ZTE-in-the-UK-using-patents-it-recently-acquired-from-Nokia.htm
Sorry, but I disagree with your prior post. That's o.k. because it's good for conversation and too get things cleared up.
LOL, Totally agree.
I thought we could not sue for foreign damages because 420 and 664 are only U.S. patents.
Aren't the infringements by ZTE the Nokia patents?
I think it's set for sometime in Feb in the U.K.
Eva, I just read that too. I called the courthouse and they told me to go into breaking news on the website and then look on Pacer. They would have the updated dockets. I think what shows here are just the court hearing and not chambers hearings, if that's where it's being held.
I also called JJ chambers deputy and left a message for her to call me back. Hope she calls and confirms and confirms something. They stay pretty closed lipped on the phone. We'll see.
If I get a call back I'll post it.
These are the phone numbers.
Telephone Directory
Clerk's Office
Emergency/Inclement Weather Closing Line
757-222-7499
The above number is the weather emergency line for the Norfolk Courthouse only. The Newport News Courthouse has a separate weather emergency line. If you are interested in information about the operating status of the Newport News Courthouse, you may obtain this information by calling (757) 247-0785.
Civil
757-222-7201
Criminal
757-222-7202
Jury, Financial & Administration
757-222-7200
Magistrate Courtroom Deputies
757-222-7222
Clerk's Office Fax Numbers
Criminal 757-222-7236
Civil 757-222-7259
Courtroom Deputies 757-222-7257
Administration 757-222-7229
Chambers
Chief Judge Rebecca Beach Smith
757-222-7001
Judge Raymond A. Jackson
757-222-7003
Judge Mark S. Davis
757-222-7014
Judge Arenda Wright Allen 757-222-7013
Senior Judge Robert G. Doumar
757-222-7006
Senior Judge Henry Coke Morgan, Jr.
757-222-7002
Magistrate Judge Tommy E. Miller
757-222-7007
Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller
757-222-7012
Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard
757-222-7020
Magistrate Judge William T. Prince
757-222-7008
Copy Service
Creative Assistant
April Hamilton
600 Granby Street
4th Floor
Norfolk, VA 23510
Copy Request Form
757-624-9990
FAX: 757-624-9998
Frequently Requested Numbers
Federal Public Defender 757-457-0800
U.S. Attorney's Office 757-441-6331
U.S. Bankruptcy Court 757-222-7500
U.S. Marshals Service
757-963-5963
U.S. Pretrial Office
757-222-7400
U.S. Probation Office
757-222-7300
From Edvacourt on YMB
Post trial: Damages Error by Jury
By edvacourt . 33 minutes ago . Permalink
It seems pretty clear at this point that the jury miscalculated the damages. I wasn't clear myself whether the 3.5% for the past 14 months would be added or not. Anyone who was in that courtroom left confused and had only what we were given at that moment. I believe the question the jury asked the court earlier in the day was equally misunderstood by the Judge. I do think that Judge Jackson realizes this mistake and despite what some on this board are saying about him I found him to be very fair in the courtroom. I believe he will fix this as it is not just and is not in keeping with the evidence presented in the courtroom. Everyone who is long here has something riding on the court getting this right but screaming louder and calling folks names won't get it done. Have a little patience and I believe we will all be rewarded.
http://finance.yahoo.com/mbview/threadview/?&bn=335d0cab-c8c2-325a-b1c7-5bd038d7c88f&tid=1352257132484-d91c4219-20ee-4fe0-9526-604367348ace&tls=la%2Cd%2C2
FROM THE WSJ.
Vringo was awarded a 3.5% running royalty rate off a portion of the defendants' search-advertising revenue until the patents expire in 2016. The person close to the case said the royalties should be far more significant than the past damages and could be worth several million dollars a year.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203846804578103153479756898.html
Ed doesn't email, he just post 1,2 or 3x/day on YMB. Mike's email wasn't compromised it was just locked. This was on another board and explains what happened. If Mike can't email he will be posting. Email is faster of course. We'll find out tomorrow. Mike has over 170 on his email list.
Google email server has the following restrictions: (from google documentation)
you can only send to a maximum of 500 messages per day, but there is also the limit of 100 recipients for any given message when sending via the Gmail smtp server.
Outlook.com/hotmail.com:
100 addresses on one email
300 messages per day - each address on an email counts towards the limit
There is no easy way around it. Only work around would be, you creating multiple email accounts and send from each of the account.
Thanks for adding JJ.
I wasn't sure what NW was going at me for and questioning ED. We all know Ed has been spot on and I don't pump, bash or b.s. anyone.
Again, thanks for adding to my post so it shows further facts about the process and waiting period.
GL amigo.
I don;t know him personally but he's been posting info for us for quite some time. Everything he has posted has been spot on. As with MikeHD. Ed has been sitting there waiting for a verdict. Mike as well, and a few others.
I'm kind of lost where you see the judge sits there all day. Today the judge mentioned he had other things to attend to. I'm sure he's sitting in chambers as well. The judge and lawyers all disappear until needed.
If the jury has a question the judge has to be available to answer their questions.
Where did you see me post anything like that?
The report I posted is from Ed who has been sitting in the courtroom for weeks and reporting to us what he sees and hears.
REPORT FROM EDVACOURT
Trial Update: 6PM Jury has gone home but the end seems near
By edvacourt . 40 minutes ago . Permalink
I'm not sure what is going on here but I had a previous post, after the jury's most recent questions, blocked. In short the jury came back and asked...if a running royalty rate is determined are we to assign a rate to each defendant. About 12 people hurried out of the courtroom as soon as Judge Jackson read this question and the Google attorneys visibly sighed. I am not entirely sure that I understood the next question but it was something to the effect of does the rate change by city. I still don't quite get that but it is pretty safe to say at this point that they are determining damages and are working on trying to figure out the running royalty figure. Since Dr. Becker showed a range between 3.5%-5% the jury could theoretically pick a larger number than his recommended 3.5%. The judge may in turn feel compelled to utilize that same rate when determining the future royalties. Since the earlier question in the day related to how far back they could go to #$%$ infringement on the part of 3rd party or non-Google defendants, I think we are seeing strong evidence that this jury may be determined to be very tough on these defendants. If I were Google right now I would be on the phone trying to come to a settlement number with Vringo. I cannot say this strongly enough. If I am wrong then what I saw today must have been make believe...that would be the only answer for it and I don't think that is the case. I expect a verdict for the plaintiff tomorrow or a settlement. Just my opinion based upon everything I know and have seen. Good night...jury reconvenes at 10AM tomorrow.
Email from Mike:
the other matter at hand does not involve the vrng/goog case. judge expected this to be done on Friday and has other cases to hear. I hope this doesn't slow things down.
He can carry on with other business while he awaits the jury verdict.
If the jury delivers a verdict he will come right back to our case.
Agree. It's an imposter. Damn idiots on Yahoo
UPDATE FROM EDVACOURT
Jury wants to know, do they add taxes, and lawyers fees or does judge.. Jury seems motivated to get it done today-More great news, makes me want to run and buy more shares--I think I will real quick, before they come back for verdict. Judge seems restless today, and jokes with court reporter alot-Though he seems annoyed with Jury somewhat..
Sentiment: Strong Buy
From Mike HD in court:
question from Jury. what is the date to be used for infringement of third parties. insert from Judge Jackson date of infringement of third parties is relevant only if you are calculating damages