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.
A patent jury in CA may have more to decide than rewards. See "Model Patent Jury Instructions" for California... I'm no lawyer either. Just trying to figure this out.
Wow! That's fantastic news. If I understand this right, it now goes before a jury to determine rewards. All the limines must be to establish what can or cannot be argued before the jury.
Apple's profits and the impact this patent has on so many peripherals, could knock the doors off a Cadillac.
Case value for DSS patent depends on "article of manufacture". It could be based on a component of the iPhone, the total iPhone, or both the total iPhone and the component. Apple could be liable for all the profits from whichever one of these is applicable. If Apple is liable for iPhone and component , it could be billions. I think DSS's patent is used in other Apple products, so the same thing would apply.
It seems logical the federal court ruling on DSS patent will come before the February court date. Maybe, if we are blessed with a partial summary judgement, a jury will suggest the patent's worth. Its likely to be appealed and the Supreme Court would make clear how the "article of manufacture" applies to this patent. The Apple v. Samsung case addresses this but not fully.
I think its both hardware and software. Maybe, it has an internet operating system (ios).
NO. this was a ruling on an Apple patent.
I remembered there was a lawsuit between the two, so I googled "Apple v. Samsung. Up came "Apple v. Samsung Supreme Court decision". I selected an article "Supreme Court Decides Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc". It gives the case it's entire background. AT the bottom of the article, in red, is "download Opinion of the Court". Its the Supreme Courts decision made in Oct., 2016. Sotomayer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
The Courts opinion left some things vague, particularly the individual component part. When I read the DSS court case, it made more sense about how it could be valuable. I think some of the articles I've read have misunderstood this. Also, Sotomayor said the court had not been requested to test this, so they had no reason to further explain. I believe they have settled this case out of court.
Thanks. your info about the clerks notice was very helpful. I would have never found that.
I have found out that DSS's patented component is the device that makes it possible for the IPhone to communicate with all of its hard peripherals. The Supreme Court ruling concerning similar screens, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,ET AL. v. APPLE INC." now includes in its "articles of manufacture" not only the total IPhone but also, individual components of the IPhone. By including individual components, does that mean DSS now has that bridge that allows them to include total profits from the hard peripherals with the total profits from the IPhone? That total would be huge.
Also in the ruling, Justice Sotomayor, when addressing a "threshold matter",---note the last sentence.. "Under the latter interpretation, a patent holder will sometimes be entitled to the infringers total profit from a component of the end product". That's new.
I know I've got the cart before the horse here.
That's true. One thing I realize, this stock demands a lot of patience. Establishing a base takes time. May have to stick.
I began buying this stock (before Mr. Chan) when it was $1.51 ps. I purchased more to soften the burden at much lower prices. Lots of promises in between. I, too, thought Chan's leadership could change things, but he never did step up. I suspect he came close to making some deals, but who knows. That's one of the troubles with this company...they don't tell you much.
Actually, I knew that.
When you look at this stock and you obviously see that it has done absolutely nothing in several years and it makes a claim it needs to revive the core business, who is willing to wait around to see if they possibly can. More than likely a reverse split will take place and you know who takes the brunt of that. Personally, I'm looking for a way out. In my opinion, any help for this company from a lawsuit opens the door for me and I might make some profit here, though it may be only a dime. By the way, has this company ever made a profit?
This info sounds very positive for DSS. Thank you for your effort.
Also, Apple has requested a summary judgement. If the judge agrees, the case is dismissed. I think this could end that way, or if DSS gets lucky, it could continue to jury trial to determine monetary value. That would be huge, but like you say, not likely. Btw, thank you for correcting me about PTAB and I appreciate your comments.
I think so. What's your understanding of "dispositive motion"? I'm no lawyer. Or it could continue to a jury if in favor of DSS.
Obviously you don't get it. I was never an investor for law suit reasons, nor would I ever be. I just can't toss away years of litigation, a favorable PTAB ruling and, win or not, a decision this close at hand.
You should ask Mr. Chan why he bought 6 million shares of DSS stock, not me. The DSS v. APPLE law suit began almost 7 years ago. The answer to this trial could come in 10 days. TEAR UP YOUR TICKET NOW!!!
Have you read DSS Technology Management, Inc. v. Apple. Inc. filing 353, page 3, line 25 & 26? Its right there.
Its my understanding that there could be a dispositive motion. you can look that up.
I'm sure you know I'm referring to the court trial Appl vs Dss. How could you miss that?
Just was not sure if DSS had given up ownership benefits (if any) to the legal team. Thanks for your comments. I am keeping my fingers crossed that the judge will rule in favor of DSS in his review next week. I think its over if he does not.
I first thought that shutting down the IP monetization practice was to be abruptly canceled. With the DSS vs APPL case about to be resolved,that just wouldn't make much since. Certainly our CEO will act on a case by case basis. If anyone reading this is planning to attend the stockholders' meeting, would he or she please ask a question about the IP. So far, this company has done nothing but played a game of take away and fattened their own pocketbooks. It leaves one grasping for straws.
Will Mr. Chan be at the stockholders' meeting or will it just be the other board members? So far, I haven't heard a direct word from him. I'm sure he's a real person. I'm all for his appearance!
I read my white proxy voting instructions today. Still not sure how I will vote. I think one share counts as one vote. If that's the case, maybe my 25,000 shares could mean something.
So the question is; could this be a 50 thousand dollar savings or a billion dollar mistake? We shall soon find out...Who knows, maybe there is time for Mr Chan to reconsider and get back in the game.
Wow! Talk about pulling the rug out from under you. With only 23 days before a judge's review on a "partial summary judgement" request by DSS lawyers in their case against Apple, this company suddenly drops its financial support. Its like carelessly throwing down the football just before crossing the goal line. There was a chance for DSS to win here, but they have thrown it all away. Just my opinion.
Good luck to all!
I think I am wrong here. Mayo would have to be selected for oral presentation, not just volunteer. Data could still be good.
I can find no evidence that any of the authors of the PH1 data paper (P108) have chosen to attend SITC 2017 to reinforce their findings. Were they too late to sign up? Are the results ho-hum? We will know soon.
Does anyone know what went on at Mon. and Tues. meetings?
Right now, and I think Phantom would agree, this stock seems much less a risk and has much more potential to succeed than ever before.
I'm thinking much quicker. A string of good news, and we may not even want a buy-out.
That would be such a give-away. This stock will, in my opinion, be worth billions soon.
After posting a comment about slow peer review, I thought about this (symposium embargo) being a possibility for delayed PH1 results. I hope its one of those selected for oral presentation.
Well said Shaker!
Any comments about the secondary offering (S3)?
PubMed says a properly prepared electronic file of a citation or abstract can be available to the public within 24 hours. According to the last CC, the paper has already been prepared. The peers have got to be tired of looking at it by now. Just my opinion.
I understand a lot about what you are saying, but biotech stocks that do not make money have to be carefully weighed as to whether potential value is more than company maintenance. There is no way I'm going to wait years to find that out. That's why I push for long term results on PH1 studies. That info is to be presented soon, we think. I know these are small studies, but they are targeted, so I don't look at numbers. Ph2 tests of other drugs have fizzled too many times, so I like getting beyond that as well. If this approach is still causing responses after all this time, then I'm still in. This is just my opinion and I am often wrong, so do your own DD.
We will know when we get there.
I liked that quote as it better defined the trial reporting as imminent, in the process, a matter of procedure, and mostly mechanical. We will "soon" see. Just my opinion. Thanks again.