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.
Might find this interesting ...
https://www.nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=Tbe98gTpyq5AlNQDuNcpjA%253d%253d
Reinstated last night. Note the new CEO
That's incredibly ironic, would you believe I had done the same thing today?
But I was looking to see if the cusip # might have been picked up. Had looked into this awhile back, the cusip numbers are different, so there's no correlation between them. China Energy just took on the old ticker which became available after Convergence was revoked.
Hopp Companies - Annual Revenue Estimate
$1 to 2.5 million
https://www.manta.com/c/mvr90vv/hopp-companies
Hopp Companies has warehouses in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, Colorado, Georgia, California and Michigan.
This acquisition was actually noted in that settlement agreement:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=12316404
Scroll down to the bottom - "Schedule A"
http://hoppcompanies.com/
Supposed to receive divy's from LTCP:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/HAON/news/Halitron--Inc--Sells-Two-Brands-in--3--Million-Deal----To-Issue-Dividend?id=164871&b=y
They have not filed their Corporate papers with the State of Virginia as required to keep your Corporate license up to date.
Just to clarify, it wasn't cancelled just shortened a day.
Interesting bit of news recently:
Integumen (LSE: SKIN), the personal health care company developing and commercialising technology and products for the human integumentary system, is pleased to provide an update on its patents and trademarks.
The Company has received:
· a Notice of Allowance ("NOA") for the trademark "Clarogel" in the United States of America, an anti-microbial formulation of usnic acid which is a late stage product designed for blemish control. Since it has received the NOA, Integumen intends to apply for the trademark registration of Clarogel in the United States of America with immediate effect.
· a NOA for its base Visible Youth patent in Canada, for the cosmetic composition for the treatment of skin. These compositions include the combination of Hyaluronic acid and bioactive glass powder which form the basis of Integumen's line of Visible Youth products, a range of cosmeceuticals targeting the anti-ageing market.
· a patent in the United States for the manufacture and sale of TS1, a tongue vacuum cleaner.
Clarogel™
Clarogel is an anti-microbial formulation of usnic acid which is a late stage product designed for blemish control. The Company's copper salt of usnic acid is a synthetic derivative of a compound which is found naturally in lichen. It is a permitted cosmetic ingredient in the EU and US with anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory properties. Clarogel was subject to a clinical study in 2011 against a market leading product and demonstrated a greater reduction in inflamed lesions than the comparator after one month of use, and was responsible for significant reductions in sebum excretion*. Integumen is in the process of altering the formulation of Clarogel to improve scent, colour and stability issues evident in the original product.
Integumen is the registered owner of a trademark for Clarogel in the EU.
* Source: Clearasil Product Sales Analysis, Evaluate Pharma, Evaluate Limited, www.evaluate.com
Visible Youth™
Visible Youth Consumer and Visible Youth Professional are a consumer and professional range of
'cosmeceuticals' targeting the anti-ageing market. Steeped in evidence-based science, Visible Youth Professional and Consumer skin care products contain the optimal size, purest and most effective Hyaluronic acid molecular fraction and Bioactive Vitryxx®* for deep-penetrating hydration. The unique line of proprietary formulations helps restore the skin's natural supply of HA-water complex, resulting in long-lasting benefits for all skin types.
A NOA is a written notification from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that a specific trademark has received no opposition from being registered following publication in the Official Gazette. Once a NOA has been received, an applicant is then permitted to file for the registration of the trademark.
TS1™
TS1 is a disposable tongue vacuum cleaner for professional use in the dental surgery. The product is a two-component plastic device which has two active sides, a knobby back to massage the tongue and break the biofilm and an open lamella front to clean the tongue by removing plaque. The tongue vacuum cleaner is simply attached to the saliva ejector tube, which is connected to the vacuum unit of the dentist chair. The size of saliva ejectors is standardised and universally found in dental surgeries.
Declan Service, CEO of Integumen, said:
"These trademarks and patents are highly valuable additions to our intellectual property portfolio and a positive step forward as we seek to generate value through distribution partners or licence agreements."
Where did you get Dec. from?
My thinking as well. Half expecting they'll get Qualcomm to expound on that archaic phone architecture the way they're going about this.
That would be impressive :)
NOTICE of Third-Party Subpoenas on Broadcom Limited by Atlantic Broadband Group, LLC, Bright House Networks, ...
" ... defendant's will serve the subpoenas ... on Broadcom Limited"
From the redacted ver.
Joseph Passalaqua
Has some ties with SGMD. Scroll down to the registrant info:
https://budlife.net.cutestat.com/
They had a couple of Pr's today as well:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SGMD/news/Sugarmade-Announces-Details-of-BudLife-Cannabis-Storage-Products?id=168026&b=y
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SGMD/news/Sugarmade-Announces-Details-of-BudLife-Cannabis-Storage-Products?id=168140&b=y
https://www.budlife.net/
Plantation Corp., a Wyoming Company, is a technology-driven organization with the goal to
establish a unique paradigm in preservation efficiency and longevity that sets a new gold
standard for the intelligent packaging industry. While still a privately-held corporation,
Plantation is currently accepting investments only from accredited investors. Additional
information can be seen at the new website at www.BudLife.net .
Good Morning. Please see the share structure below as of 8/10/2017. For future share requests, please send to the email listed below.
Authorized: 7,000,000,000
Issued: 2,964,181,540
Restricted: 1,977,601,643
Have a good day.
Regards,
Johnnie
jzarecor@pacificstocktransfer.com
Johnnie Zarecor
Pacific Stock Transfer Company
Direct: 571-485-9999
http://halitroninc.com/team/
A look at the consultant team:
Anthony LeCour:
http://www.dresnerpartners.com/leadership-anthony-lecour
http://www.dresnerpartners.com/steven-dresner
http://www.dresnerpartners.com/international
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/anthony-lecour-joins-dresner-partners-as-managing-director-2177527.htm
David Lee
http://www.demetreerealestate.com/
http://www.demetreerealestate.com/who-we-are
http://www.demetreerealestate.com/who-we-are/brokers/david-lee
http://www.demetreeglobal.com/our-relationships
http://www.realtycapitalfl.com/about/team/dlee.html
http://www.realtycapitalfl.com/newsroom/history.html
Chuck Malkus
http://chuckmalkus.com/index.html
http://chuckmalkus.com/about-chuck.html
http://www.malkusgroup.com/
http://www.ultimateponzi.com/
https://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Ponzi-Scott-Rothstein-Story/dp/1455617865/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
Rick Depp
http://rockymountainhighbrands.com/about/
http://liverockymountainhigh.com/
http://smallcapvoice.com/blog/11-25-16-smallcapvoice-interview-with-rocky-mountain-high-brands-inc-rmhb/
RMHB- https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/RMHB/profile
Randall Roddy
https://www.intelius.com/people/Randall-Roddy/Phoenix-AZ/068GHS07AFW
mbabeverage.com
(Product consulting agreement with RHMB)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1670869/000167086916000003/ex10_18.htm
Peter Popovich
https://www.argotea.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_Tea
https://www.amazon.com/Argo-Tea-Green-Ginger-Twist/dp/B00CTJ1R66
Frank Brady
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/life/entertainment/story/2014/sep/04/new-app-digital-time-capsule-store-digital-h/266261/
https://www.annistonstar.com/news/local-entrepreneur-launches-time-capsule-app/article_f61be498-1453-11e4-b1fc-0019bb2963f4.html
LTCP
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/LTCP/profile
A few of us have been ... subtlety, expressing similar sentiments for months :)
It does.
That's Pacelli's (ChanBonds) rebuttal essentially.
Short and concise. Actually would have expected Stacy to interject there.
Ironically ...
Q. So, I would like to take you back
3 to your expert report.
4 A. Declaration.
5 Q. Sorry.
6 A. That's okay.
7 Q. And actually, before we get there,
8 let me --
9 A. We can agree to use the words
10 interchangeably.
11 Q. We may have to. That is an old
12 habit.
13 A. Yeah. Me, too.
Circular reasoning, obfuscation ... ambiguity. It honestly looks very weak. In a former life I sat in on the Intel vs. AMD case and reading this stuff was like a trip down memory lane ...
"The microcode contained in Intel's microprocessors and microcomputers" (Loosely recalled)
An absurd and inordinate amount of time was centered around just this phraseology, which to me at least translated to: AMD stating that they had rights and access to Intel's microcode for all eternity and Intel countering with "Your nuts".
I thought both sides were idiot's for agreeing to such an ambiguous terminology in the first place, although I sided with Intel considering everything else that was going on at the time it was written, other subordinating factors ...
Bit of a different animal comparing what's going on here but just commenting on the tactics. These guy's are trying to draw out any reference they can and put doubt on these expert testimonies to try and build a counter response for their appeal. From what I've been reading so far, if this is all they've got working for them it should be a short court session.
Interesting side note I came across in re: to the above:
Patents are tricky things, and litigating them can be very risky. You must balance the desire to keep competition from violating your IP, but at the same time minimize the risk that your patent is declared invalid. This is why most cases end up in an out of court settlement, usually via arbitration. Actual patent jury trials are fairly rare, as they are very expensive and very risky to all parties involved
"Again, and my previous answer was
3 completely responsive, because the first
4 thing I said was the following: To the best
5 of my recollection, I don't know that the
6 term "frequency band" appears literally in
7 the specification; however, the idea of
8 frequency band occurs frequently, and I know
9 that the Board used the word -- the term
10 "frequency band" in the context of other
11 patents that have this same specification."
This is great reading ... :)
Just got off the phone with Etrade - Same info
Their CFO resigned tail end of April. I would assume the filings will get corrected once that has been rectified.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=11335321
He's not, he's an expert witness for ChanBond - Cisco is deposing him.
Just read through:
https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2016-01744/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._7941822/05-17-2017-Patent_Owner/Exhibit-2002-44-DECLARATION_OF_SCOTT_M_NETTLES%2C_PHD/
That's quite an impressive consulting record at the bottom there.
Initially I had taken this as someone Cisco had brought in, but he's ChanBond's expert witness that they are deposing.
Consulting
August 2016 - Present
Type of Matter: Inter Partes Review
Law Firm: Ascenda Law Group representing Chanbond LLC
Case: RPX Corp v. Chanbond LLC - Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Cases IPR2016-00234
Services Provided: Retained as a testifying expert witness. Produced declarations in support of
the patent owner in the above-mentioned matters. Deposed on declarations.
After hours news out - https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/PGPM/news
Even more interesting ....
Yes, one of the reasons I stayed in this to begin with. Whether he takes the reigns again or hands it off, good to see him involved again.
Very nice, what some may not realize is Derrick Lefcoe, CEO of BDCI was CEO of EXAD prior to handing it off to Matty.
Interesting developments.
He stated, I can't answer that but all the info is with the SOS in Delaware. Yes, he stated Delaware and later today I see the May filing was with the SOS of Wyoming. What am I missing here????
As some others here have mentioned I'd still be cautious in presuming too much come Monday. Anything's possible and at worst there should be some filings on PACER, but they may or not get posted right away, could be later in the week. Goes without saying the $ these cable giants have at their disposal ... Delay tactics, behind the scenes negotiations, any number of things could take place.
Yes, gonna be a little while but there is a provision in the Integumen filings for EHSK shareholders.
Timelines -
3/3/17 - 3/6/17
STIPULATION and Proposed Order Staying Cases Pending PTAB Decision to Institute Inter Partes Review, by ChanBond, LLC. (Brauerman, Stephen) Modified on 3/3/2017 (nms)
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendants' Fourth Supplemental Invalidity Contentions filed by Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC, Time Warner Cable Inc., Cable One, Inc., Bright House Networks, LLC, RCN Telecom Services, LLC, Cox Communications, Inc., WideOpen West Finance, LLC, Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Comcast Corporation, Cequel Communications Holdings I, LLC, Cequel Communications, LLC, Atlantic Broadband Group, LLC, CSC Holdings, LLC, Cablevision Systems Corporation, Mediacom Communications Corporation, WaveDivision Holdings, LLC, Charter Communications, Inc..(Ying, Jennifer)
3/6/17 -
ORDER re (102 in 15-cv-845-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-851-RGA, 103 in 15-cv-842-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-850-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-852-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-854-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-848-RGA, 102 in 15-cv-844-RGA, 101 in 15-cv-847-RGA, 103 in 15-cv-853-RGA, 101 in 15-cv-849-RGA, 104 in 15-cv-846-RGA, 101 in 15-cv-843-RGA) Stipulation and Order to Consolidate. *All filings in these actions shall be made only in Civil Action No. 15-842-RGA. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/3/2017. Associated Cases: 1:15-cv-00842-RGA et al.(nms)
Results:
Cisco -
On March 29, 2017, six IPR petitions for US Patent Nos. 8,341,679 and 8,984,565 were denied institution. The denial was based on a difference in opinion about the broadest reasonable interpretation for the term “RF channel,” which affected every claim Cisco sought to have reviewed.
RXP -
5/25/17
It is ORDERED claims 1–31 of the ’822 patent are not held unpatentable; and FURTHER ORDERED that, because this is a Final Written Decision, parties to the proceeding seeking judicial review of the decision must comply with the notice and service requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 90.2.
Links:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/9426392/ChanBond,_LLC_v_Comcast_Corporation_et_al
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132049143
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Timeline -
5/16/2017
SO ORDERED, re110 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint status report and proposed revised schedule to June 12, 2017. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/16/2017. (nms)
6/12/17
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN RE CHANBOND, LLC ) C.A. No. 15-842 (RGA) PATENT LITIGATION ) CONSOLIDATED STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, and subject to the approval of the Court, that the time for the parties to submit a joint status report and proposed revised schedule (see D.I. 109) is extended until June 15, 2017.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132033995
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=132119488
Results - (To be determined)
Consolidated Stipulation = An agreement between attorneys that concerns business before a court and is designed to simplify or shorten litigation and save costs. During the course of a civil lawsuit, criminal proceeding, or any other type of litigation, the opposing attorneys may come to an agreement about certain facts and issues. Such an agreement is called a stipulation. Courts look with favor on stipulations because they save time and simplify the matters that must be resolved. Stipulations are voluntary, however, and courts may not require litigants to stipulate with the other side. A valid stipulation is binding only on the parties who agree to it. Courts are usually bound by valid stipulations and are required to enforce them.
I guess a lot of peeps aren't familiar with Cromwell's half-baked 'regulations' and how they enforce\update willy-nilly.
This is fairly typical of them, it hasn't been 'CE' for awhile now - 'Pink Limited Information'
They'll get around to removing the scary Pirate flag eventually.
The associations from\with IPNav are interesting. Essentially, this is a cohesive whole that they acquired with ChanBond - From the patents themselves to the attorney's that had already set this in motion with pending litigation prior to Unified's assimilation.
Deirdre Leane, Carter and Spangenberg all at one time or another associated with IPNav, the level of expertise and sophistication involved, experienced attorney's at very high levels (not to mention high profile cases)... Just a few of things that have had me intrigued for well over a year here.
Essentially this is a prepackaged deal that Howe acquired and Carters involvement can't be overlooked. He's not only well invested in it's outcome holding the majority of shares but also overseeing and having 'sole and exclusive authority over the business of ChanBond' . You could almost say that ChanBond owns Unified.
To the more practical matters at hand ...
Honestly, I had this pegged early on as a real long shot, a David vs, Goliath, unlikely but still an interesting situation that might get some interest along the way. But the two recent PTAB decisions changed that significantly.
There's quite a bit out there about what this all means in cases like this:
Beating the 'Death Squad's"
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131598302
http://www.finnegan.com/resources/articles/articlesdetail.aspx?news=a1991ab3-059d-482e-a97c-0ba4b714eb1c
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1319398
http://www.microcapdaily.com/favorable-ruling-sparks-blue-calypso-inc-otcbbbcyp/115027/
As some others here have mentioned I'd still be cautious in presuming too much come Monday. Anything's possible and at worst there should be some filings on PACER, but they may or not get posted right away, could be later in the week. Goes without saying the $ these cable giants have at their disposal ... Delay tactics, behind the scenes negotiations, any number of things could take place.
Some backgrounds and general information:
Agreement with ChanBond in it's entirety:
http://www.getfilings.com/sec-filings/151124/UnifiedOnline-Inc_10-Q/uoip_ex102.htm
This is an easier to read version and contains a lot of info. For those still unclear on whether or not Unified owns ChanBond it's clearly spelled out. (Not to mention some of the exhibit's that show the restricted shares, etc.)
Lawsuit documents:
https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2xk77efdl/delaware-district-court/chanbond-llc-v-comcast-corporation-et-al/
https://www.patexia.com/company/chanbond
PTAB case report:
http://www.reexamlink.com/tag/comcast/
RPX Decision:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwjJ4aaHj7HUAhXI4CYKHcbrCTQQFggyMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fptab.uspto.gov%2Fptabe2e%2Frest%2Fpetitions%2F1461674%2Fdocuments%2Fd29ya3NwYWNlOi8vU3BhY2VzU3RvcmUvYWVkYTU3OGEtNzExMy00N2E1LWE0MTEtODJhNzcyYmRmZDg2OzEuMA%3D%3D%3D%3D%2FanonymousDownload&usg=AFQjCNHRdjky2XbwsHjj1IE-Y5_c7-qikw&sig2=KQyAcCXjJFjJfvmuAKIXpA
Deirdre Leane
The party and person that they received these patents from. This is a very successful and intelligent woman. At one point President of IPNav and slotted to be CEO, now VP Licensing at http://www.technicolor.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/deirdreleane
https://www.linkedin.com/company/technicolor?trk=ppro_cprof
See also - https://ipcloseup.com/2014/08/13/post-grant-reviews-are-shaping-npe-patent-quality-portfolio-size/
http://www.ipbc.com/2014/AudioVideo/VideoDetail.aspx?g=49954542-284e-48a7-9270-58fbf9a90c36
http://www.iqpc.com/media/7029/6205.pdf.deleted
http://acaciaresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/IAM-74_Top-of-the-tree.pdf
http://www.iam-media.com/Search?qs=Deirdre+Leane
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/03/22/471436/249989/en/IP-Navigation-Group-Lead-Sponsor-at-2012-Global-IP-Exchange.html
William R. Carter, Jr (Billy Carter)
Who also owns the vast majority of the shares here:
https://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=11010807
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=106487950
An interesting read, (note the associations with *Erich Spangenberg)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/how-a-typical-patent-battle-took-an-unexpected-turn.html
Erich Spangenberg*
https://www.linkedin.com/in/erichspangenberg
http://www.marathonpg.com/news/press-releases/detail/1120/erich-spangenberg-joins-marathon-patent-group-management
https://www.ip-watch.org/2016/06/03/qa-with-erich-spangenberg-on-patents-and-drug-prices/
http://spangenblog.com/about-us/
http://www.iam-media.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=fe3d6b8e-0cc9-4425-83ea-761e098c7eee
Robert M. Howe
CEO of Unified.
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=232373&privcapId=1199443 (Read full background)
http://www.42ventures.com/team/bob-howe/
http://www.highnotefoundry.com/who-we-are/
Robert Whitman
Lead attorney for ChanBond
https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-whitman-217889
http://www.mishconnewyork.com/people/robert_whitman
(Additionally, see Mark Raskin, John F. Petrsoric, Andrea Pacelli PhD for ChanBond from the same firm) http://www.mishconnewyork.com
https://www.law360.com/articles/907966/ptab-nixes-six-cisco-ipr-petitions-over-networking-patents
IPNav
Now defunct- https://thepatentinvestor.com/2014/07/ipnavs-spangenberg-downsizes-with-eye-on-much-bigger-prizes/
Any number of notations of IPNav in publications, etc. For instance:
https://journals.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/stanford-technology-law-review/online/vol17issue3final.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/has-patent-will-sue-an-alert-to-corporate-america.html
Misc.
Additional attorneys for ChanBond:
http://www.bayardlaw.com/
Will follow up with some observations ...