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.
I've read the patents more times than most.
It is not abstract - it is a CLEAR invention over prior art.
The full integration of legacy (PSTN and Cellular) and internet based systems had not been achieved before. Digifonica built the nodes to prove they could do it.
His closing argument was on point. The judges have what they need to remand back for
claim construction.
Will they?
Stay tuned
but it got past all of them, which the Judges know....
have you even bothered to read our response for the Federal Circuit?
another prediction?
How about this...You will see threes and fours before low 2's.
oh - is that why Apple brought in their most high powered law firm to try to take down VPLM?
Is that why they appealed all of the PTAB rulings...???
too funny...Apple not concerned? of course they are...
Do you know how many before you have predicted that?
and they were all proven WRONG.
Apple's not laughing
LOLOL
The "warning".........
then don't be a Judge.
Voip Pal deserves a fair hearing. Clearly Koh doesn't want to be bothered and her saying so is outrageous .
USPTO Director Iancu would disagree.
Simply not true..
The new attorney for VPLM speaks volumes about the potential for this company and its IP
and yet, the stock moves higher....now .023....
the market disagrees with you....
You mean when the company has patents that are being infringed, and can't get them licensed because the infringers know the system protects infringers by forcing patent owners to go through an exhaustive process to enforce their rights?
I have spoken with IP Watchdog many times over the past few years. They are NOT paid by Voip Pal or Emil to publish op-eds. It is that simple. They have other sponsored ads on the site. You are incorrect.
no- this is completely off the mark.
exactly correct. If the PTAB is going to be the structure for post grant review, then it is logical for any Alice 101 challenges to be handled there. Once past the PTAB, the case should immediately go into District Court for claim construction and damages. That was the intent of the AIA - to create a post grant review that, when completed, would speed up the process in court. the US Patent office takes up 35-101 when granting or rejecting applications. The PTAB should handle post grant review of 101, pre-trial.
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/101_step1_refresher.pdf
IP Watchdog has just published an important op-ed regarding the need for Alice 101 reform. This is a must read for anyone interested in seeing patent rights protected. It makes great sense for the PTAB, as a post grant review structure, to also take up any 101,102 etc... challenges. where the panel of judges has the technical expertise to address obviousness and abstractness of patent claims.
Bravo to Emil Malak and his legal team for this excellent op-ed.
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2020/01/04/plea-clarity-new-approach-section-101-2020/id=117537/
HERE's another RECAP
VPLM awaiting Federal Circuit decision on appeal from District Court
Movement toward revisiting Alice 101
Senate working on new legislation (Coons, Tillis)
Undefeated at the PTAB
Gee I didn't realize that the seamless integration of cellular and wi-fi was ancient...
Thanks for informing us
Old, outdated patents? Someone should tell the PTAB
That's not how it works.
Tech giants infringe until they are forced to license.
That's what Voip Pal is doing.
that's what makes a market....
And what if VPLM wins the appeal in Federal Circuit?
Claim construction time....
Well, you see, court case ARE very relevant when you're discussing a company with patents...
Crushed? LOLOLOL
The company is not going to put out fluff pieces when everyone who really cares knows that the important next event is the first Federal Circuit Appeal to be heard in 2020.
Unless of course the Senate takes action on Alice 101 prior to the ruling by the Circuit
you claim to be a shareholder
If you are, you bought the stock because you believed the patents are valuable.
And yet you spend all of your time dismissing their value
Curious
Excellent points -thank you.
more nonsense
nonsense
Is that why Apple is spending a fortune on every possible way to stop VPLM?
I bet Apple has "deciphered" the patents....and when it comes to Face Time in particular, they might have some "concerns"......
what I'm saying is that if Apple had lost, it would have been appealed to the Circuit, as well. I cannot imagine either side not wanting a 3 member panel of Judges to decide the Alice motion- (which should have been decided at the PTAB level in IPR, in my humble opinion.)
The ALICE MOTIONS were ALWAYS going to be decided in the FEDERAL CIRCUIT.
Kevin Malek NEVER said that.....
NOTHING wrong with representation
Not Voip Pal, but the arguments are relevant
Federal Circuit Overturns Alice Invalidation
Author: Stephen A. Kennedy
In McRO, Inc., DBA Planet Blue v. Namco Games, et. al, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a trial court’s finding that a software patent claims an abstract idea and is invalid under the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in the Alice case. McRo involved patents that cover a method for synchronizing lip and facial movements for animated 3-D characters, such as those displayed in video games.
At the trial court, the Defendants argued that McRO’s patents claim “a concept that is inherent in human speech” which constitutes an abstract idea ineligible for patent protection. The Defendants highlighted that there are only a finite number of ways that the human mouth will appear as it expresses speech and sounds and thus claimed that McRo’s patents merely automated a pre-existing process that could be drawn with pen and paper. The lower court agreed and found that the claims were too broad and that they covered abstract ideas. Under the Alice standard, a patent may not cover an abstract idea and accordingly, the lower court invalidated the patents under 35 USC § 101.
The Federal Circuit reversed the lower court and found that the patents at issue constituted patent-eligible subject matter under §101: “When looked at as a whole, claim 1 is directed to a patentable, technological improvement over the existing, manual 3-D animation techniques. The claim uses the limited rules in a process specifically designed to achieve an improved technological result in conventional industry practice. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2358 (citing Diehr, 450 U.S. at 177). Claim 1 of the ’576 patent, therefore, is not directed to an abstract idea.” The Court found that the claims were “limited to a specific process for automatically animating characters using particular information and techniques and does not preempt approaches that use rules of a different structure or different techniques.” The Federal Circuit cautioned lower courts reviewing patents for invalidity to “avoid oversimplifying the claims.”
Chelsie Spencer is a Senior Associate with the Dallas office of Kennedy Law, PC. She may be reached at 214-716-4345.
Negative posts abound - and the stock goes higher......
total BS
that MUST explain why the stock has gone UP almost every day since the most recent Alice ruling by Judge Koh.....
Eh?