FIRST UOIP:
For those that have not been following the story, in a nutshell UOIP has been suing the likes of Arris Corporation ($27.00) and CSCO, among others like Comcast and basically all companies who utilize streaming cable. CSCO created the technology and for some unexplained reason sold it to UOIP, without having patented the technology. UOIP patented the technology, thus giving them rights for licensing, royalties etc... CSCO marketed the technology without permission from UOIP, who had patented it by now, and companies have been deriving millions in revenue, infringing upon UOIP's patent, without any recompense. This situation has been tied up in litigation for the past 2 and 1/2 years, whereupon today, there was a hearing asking the court to issue a stay, delaying yet another year this issue from going to trial. CSCO and the other companies have deep pockets and they hoped to outlast UOIP with delay tactics. That all ended today as their motion to stay was summarily denied. meaning this is now set for trial in October. Please see below my thoughts on what happens next:
Today's hearing provided an inside glimpse into the immediate direction of this equity and its' short to long term outlook. The petitioner's stay was denied, but what was more interesting was the lambasting that the petitioner's got from the presiding judge. Basically he accused them of dragging their respective feet in an attempt to drain the defendant's resources and tie up the case in endless litigation. The court will now have no more of it. Here are my presumptions of what is happening now:
1) The attorneys representing the petitioners were most likely anticipating the results, maybe not the tongue lashing, but nonetheless the end results.
2) With the aforementioned being said, the petitioners were probably advised to assess royalties, damages, costs and expenses related to resolving this issue. I previously articulated these thoughts on earlier postings. The corporations that are involved with this litigation are smart, anticipatory and conniving. They cannot risk going to trial and having all of this David vs. Goliath scenario play out in open court. The jury will clearly be sympathetic to UOIP.
3) Predicated on that point, a settlement offer or outright takeover of UOIP is being formulated, or has already been drafted. As Arris has previously identified in their latest 10Q, this litigation must now appear on all related companies quarterly statements as a probable liability expense that share holders need to be aware of. It is called the risk inherent clause.
4) The attorneys and corporate litigation specialists are again, as I previously articulated, assessing damages and culpabilities related to these torts and I anticipate a lot of finger pointing is about to ensue. This bodes well for us. As the respective companies will now be looking to limit their own exposure losing focus on fighting UOIP, which, with every accusation and counter-accusation actually proves their case in chief.
5) In my assessment of this case Arris and CSCO are most culpable here. In a multi-defendant case, the court will divide culpability by recidivism, intent and maliciousness. The fact that this case has been ongoing for 2 and 1/2 years with no stoppage on the infringement of the patents, the court will find these reoccurrence egregious. Egregious in a civil tort case is one of the most damaging things a defendant can be accused of. Inherent in that word are all of the aforementioned adjectives, (maliciousness, recidivistic, and intentional), all crushing to defend. This of course bodes even better for us.
In summation, today's win by UOIP cannot be understated. The win in and of itself is great, but the court's diatribe of frustration will be heard by the companies counsel as a warning shot across the bow of their sinking ship.
SPORTYNORTY
