UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[dillythekid]

Just some random things going back over the last 6 months to start our day:

Chanbond has had Pro Hac Vice Appearances from:
-Attorney Charles Wizenfeld
http://www.mishconnewyork.com/people/charles_wizenfeld
-Attorney Eric Berger
http://www.dbc-iplaw.com/berger.html
-Attorney Andrea Pacelli
http://newyork.citybizlist.com/article/381005/intellectual-property-counsel-andrea-pacelli-joins-mishcon-de-reya-new-yorks-litigation-practice
-Attorney Lana Milojevi
http://www.mishconnewyork.com/people/lana_milojevic

(Attorney who is licensed in the jurisdiction requests that the non-licensed attorney be admitted to practice in a particular case)


Defendants have subpoenaed the following third parties:
-Cathleen Thomas Quigley
https://www.linkedin.com/in/quigleytom

-Cable Television Laboratories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CableLabs

-Intel Corporation, Texas Instruments, Inc, Arris Group, Inc, Cisco Systems, Inc
(Those are some BIG names)

-Tarek Fahmi of Ascenda Law Group
http://ascendalaw.com/

-Deirdre Lane
Someone had a post with something related to this person, I cannot find anything. Intel? Or Someone Who Knows..
-William R. Carter, Jr.
(Our Boy)

Then of course the deposition of:
-James Finnegan
https://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/leadership-overview/james-finnegan
-Great Post and Link Here: https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=140400951

Sounds like some heavy info..
Then immediately following Mr Finnegan's Deposition, we get the motion to stay, and discovery disputes. A couple of sealed letters to the judge later, we have a date set 6/13/2018 where:
-@ 11:30 AM in Courtroom 6A, the motion to stay will be orally argued
-@ 2:00 PM in Courtroom 6A, Court will hold a conference to resolve the discovery issues/letters

Judge Andrews in the past has denied so hopefully this will be the case:
-EXAMPLE-Thursday, December 01, 2016
81 order Oral Order Thu 10:22 AM
ORAL ORDER: The Motion to Stay (D.I.70 ) is DENIED without prejudice to renew by letter request after March, 28, 2017. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 12/1/2016. (nms)

Arris Filed its 5 petitions on February 2, 2018
https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/caselist?petitioners=Arris+International+PLC

I keep seeing posts regarding when something should show on this but Im curious to know what that is based on? (ICE) 90 days from something or?

https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/ptab-filings%2FIPR2018-00574%2F10
- This maps out justification for why IPR should NOT be instituted and it is spot on!

As far as CAFC goes I had posted this earlier regarding 63 days but nobody cared to comment:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://sunsteinlaw.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Website-IPR-2016-12.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjA9pupg53bAhXB21MKHWepD-4QFjAAegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0wEoFaM8MyUeTDyNYJ3CHk

https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1216.html

And Chanbond is already appealing the Final Written Decision on the claims they lost. Going for a home run!

Love to hear any input from the old heads here that have been quiet as of late. There is a ton of past experience and expertise that really contributes a ton to this board and its greatly appreciated

LONG UOIP