Zerify Inc (ZRFY)

[Gold49er]

longbord, I see there was not a reply to your question.

Is Sal done with DUO or just representing TW and Cen. as well?

Sal is with BR, so no he's not representing TW and Cen..

Sal was just Hired by BR in Jan/Feb, and had been working on the DUO case and what I gleam from Z's post, Sal has now moved over to the TW & Cen cases.

There appears to be an Obvious Conclusion there, but we are still in the dark, but all signs seem to point to 1 down 2 to go.

But I'll let Z explain what he meant.

I just wanted to clarify Sal is just representing SFOR. As depicted below.













Salvatore Tamburo focuses his practice mainly on intellectual property litigation with a specialty in patent litigation. His litigation experience includes dozens of matters, including seven jury trials in various U.S. district courts. He has extensive experience litigating in various different technologies, including wavelet compression, broadband services, safety caps, medical devices including suture anchors, surgical sutures and surgical techniques, nuclear technology, semiconductor technology, chemical pesticides, electrostatic dissipative industrial containers, and video displays.

Mr. Tamburo’s experience also encompasses several other aspects of intellectual property law, including licensing and counseling, drafting and prosecuting patent applications, and preparing opinions on patentability, infringement, validity, and enforceability.

Mr. Tamburo’s non-litigation experience includes various technologies such as semiconductors, optics, robotics, imagers, laser doppler velocimeters, wind farm operations, medical devices, surgical methods, gaming software, and various other technologies incorporating analog and digital circuits.

Prior to joining private practice, he worked as an electrical engineer with Signal Transformer Co., Inc. in Inwood, New York, from 1990 to 1998.

At St. John’s University School of Law, he served as an articles and notes editor on the American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review. He earned his bachelor of science degree in Electrical Engineering from New York University's Tandon School of Engineering.

SERVICES
Intellectual Property
IP Litigation
IP Licensing & Contracts
Patent
INDUSTRIES
Software
Telecommunications
ADMISSIONS
District of Columbia
New York
Supreme Court of the United States
U.S. District Court - District of Columbia
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
MEMBERSHIPS
American Bar Association
American Intellectual Property Law Association
Federal Circuit Bar Association
New York State Bar Association
EDUCATION
St. John's University School of Law, JD
New York University, BS
REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS
Dominion Resources, Inc. et al. v. Alstom Grid, Inc., 2:15-cv-00224, Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) – successfully represented patentee Dominion against competitor for electrical distribution systems software where jury found patents valid and infringed
Areva NP Inc., f/k/a Framatome ANP, Inc., v. The Babcock & Wilcox Company, et al, CL 11-006236-00, Circuit Court for the City of Lynchburg – successfully defended client B&W against charges of misappropriation of nuclear technology trade secrets
Depuy Mitek, Inc. v. Arthrex, Inc., 1:04-cv-12457, District of Massachusetts (Boston) – successfully represented defendant Arthrex against patent infringement charges where jury found patent for high strength suture was not infringed
Arthrex, Inc. v. Depuy Mitek, Inc. 2:08-cv-48, Middle District of Florida (Tampa) – successfully represented patentee Arthrex against competitor for orthopedic surgical method, court granted summary judgement of infringement
LINQ Industrial v. Intertape, Inc, et al, 8:02-cv-1148, Middle District of Florida (Tampa) – successfully represented patentee LINQ where jury found patents for anti-static bulk containers were infringed and valid
Bonutti Skeletal Innovations LLC v. Arthrex, Inc., 6:13-cv-00620, Middle District of Florida (Orlando) – successfully defended client Arthrex against charges of infringement of various medical device patents
Bashen Corporation v. MicroPact, Inc.. 4:12-cv-01566, Southern District of Texas (Houston) – successfully defended client MicroPact against charges of infringement of patent covering EEO compliance software
Orthopro, Inc v. Arthrex, Inc, 3:08-cv-01315, Northern District of Texas (Dallas) – successfully defended client Arthrex against charges of patent infringement covering various medical devices