Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[JJCook]

trade:

I took this quote from a veteran patent attorney:

"Anyway, as it stands today, the Federal Circuit has held that patent owners both have a right to a trial by jury and do not have a right to a trial by jury for validity.". This just shows the volatility of patent litigation.

To try to answer your question, I think Worlds' legal arguments could be seen in a lot of cases, but there is no consistent pattern found in the rulings. Stare decisis doesn't fit the bill here, even though it should.

"Under stare decisis, once a court has answered a question, the same question in other cases must elicit the same response from the same court or lower courts in that jurisdiction. The principle of stare decisis is not always applied with uniform strictness."

If you found ten cases with the exact same fact pattern as Worlds', and the decisions in every single one of those cases favored Worlds' position, I would not be confident that the CAFC on March 9 would follow suit. Pretty pathetic, right? It's just the way I see this and you can probably tell my view of judges is jaded and cynical.

So IMO, precedent and case law (incredibly and unbelievably) don't apply in practice.
RE: the next WDDD step - for me it's all about the panel on March 9. After that, my confidence in a successful / favorable district court decision from Judge Casper is off the charts. IMO, THIS- the CAFC- - is the last major hurdle to get that yacht, IMO.
Best !!