UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[dillythekid]

*PACER Update for Cisco**

Good Night / Good Morning to all you longs. I finally found this:

NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT. Panel: 1908F. Case scheduled August 06, 2019 10:00 a.m. at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Howard T. Markey National Courts Building, 717 Madison Place, NW Washington, DC 20439), Courtroom 203. Response to Notice of Oral Argument due: 07/15/2019. Please review the attached Notice. The response to notice of oral argument form can be found here. The Oral Argument Guide can be found here. [616183] [MJL] [Entered: 06/21/2019 05:21 PM]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-xNELgceOGXLg9CARuwUYM20Wtl3ShJY/view?usp=drivesdk


Just some other input of mine:


1.Motion for Summary Judgement from the defendants.
- After years of the back and forth in this case and given the judge's attitude in the past, I cannot imagine that he would grant this motion. This is important because from what I have read this only increases the settlement offers.


https://law.stanford.edu/2013/06/18/sla-2013-06-18-the-cost-of-discovery-and-summary-judgment-motions/

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=148109696

I read an article called the efficiency of summary judgement, googled and found that Magnus posted this previously

"Perhaps the most important feature of summary judgment is the
"settlement premium" set forth in this Essay. When a motion for
summary judgment is denied, the nonmoving party achieves a form of
premium that enables a case to settle for an additional amount. Put
simply, the settlement value of a case increases when a motion for
summary judgment is denied. Denial of summary judgment motions up
the ante in the litigation game.


https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/motion-for-summary-judgement-of-70167/

Looks like judge Andrews not afraid to deny, that's not to say he has not granted these motions ever, but as we know each case is unique.To me it is yet another stall tactic. I can't fathom the 13 lawyers truly believing their case is so slam dunk. I also find it comical the 3 players attempting a partial summary judgement, with new arguments.That should be tossed easily.

2.Valuations and royalties being discussed is always nice to see!

$ UOIP $