Jbbb, I don’t know! I surmise, the stay while very important for continuing the trial, the Arris IPR is absolutely critical to our success. The Arris petition hits at the very core of the case, whether the patents are truly patentable.
The wins against Cisco and RPX were the start, but now Arris has those two cases to learn from and use to their benefit against UOIP/Chanbond. That is concerning because institution of the IPR could drop us to our knees and if they win against any of our patents it could send the trial against the cable companies into the trash bin.
If the IPR is not instituted it will probably devastate Arris to the point of not surviving as a company in the long run, or declaring bankruptcy when they are actually asked to indemnify.
I don’t think Arris or the cable companies thought that UOIP would withstand the other IPR challenges and now that they have, Arris is in some serious trouble. I imagine that the PTAB Judges have Arris’ chances of survival in the back of their minds....I don’t think that should impact the case but it could.
If I was a lawyer I would find it interesting to know if emails or trial strategies have been discussed between Cisco RPX Arris and the 13 cable companies, after the IPRs, that could prove collusion and intent to manipulate the courts and extend the litigation process, but I am sure someone is looking at recent transfers of information between those parties!
AI
