VoIP-Pal.com filing additional infringement petitions is a sound litigation strategy. While these new petitions have no impact on active cases referenced below, these new filings force Apple to address new counts while managing active claims. Of course, Apple has the resources to handle concurrent claims; nonetheless, it is sound litigation strategy to force a defendant to engage in defending itself in multiple fronts.
Procedurally, it stands to reason that the following suits currently in litigation will be consolidated: VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Verizon Wireless Services, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-00271-RCJ-VCF VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Twitter Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-02338-RFB-CWH VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 2:16-CV-00260-RFB-VCF While hard to believe at times, our legal system strives for efficiency. To that end, it would seem counterintuitive that VoIP-Pal.com would file three independent lawsuits; however, VoIP-Pal.com's initial litigation strategy was appropriate because provided a safety-net/testing ground for VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.'s legal arguments. For example, IF one matter happened to be thrown out based on PTAB findings, the remain two matters would be still be active. VoIP-Pal.com Inc.'s counsel would than be able to adjust legal strategy to ensure the remaining matters proceeded. Now that nearly all outstanding PTAB matters are final, the district court will seek to consolidate litigation for both efficiency and to avoid disparate rulings on similar matters.
IMPORTANTLY, and in my professional capacity, I cannot emphasize enough how significant VoIP-Pal.com, Inc.'s successful navigation of all PTAB IPR challenges ON THE MERITS is in terms of the potential for favorable outcome in district court. VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. and its counsel's management of PTAB was nothing short of extraordinary--I encourage everyone with interest in VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. to keep that in mind as litigation starts to proceed in district court.
Finally, withholding updated damages totals (in the above refrenced active matters) until after VoIP-Pal.com's requested case management confrence in VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple Inc. (filed 5/23/2018) is heard, in my professional opinion, is appropriate. Generally, in litigation postured as this matter is, issuing global damages once all cases are proceeding and/or consolidated is advisable. There are many reasons for this strategy, a few of which being:
1.) it prevents having to issues multiple damages adjustments which can result in conflicts; and
2.) issuing a global-updated-damages total once all interested parties are consolidated under one setting (same judge) or at least on the same litigation track can help facilitate settlement negotiations. This is because typically only the presiding judge can compel the parties to engage in mediation. Accordingly, at the forthcoming case management conference in VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple Inc., I anticipate that VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. will request that VoIP-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple Inc. will be consolidated with the other two matters.
Cheers all,
Oh, sorry, almost forgot... All of the above is just my opinion. I am a licensed, practicing attorney with a primary focus on litigation. I don't claim to know all the intricacies of matters discussed above but my opinions above are based on my professional experience and research i've done independently--so take them as you will.
I encourage you to all to do your own due diligence and form your own opinions.
Everything here is MY OPINION! I am making NO buy or sell recommendations here! DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE!
