InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,482.87
(
0.09%
)
US TECH 100
19,307.88
(
0.48%
)
Dow Jones
39,164.06
(
0.09%
)
Brent Oil
85.68
(
0.30%
)
Bitcoin
61,472.49
(
-0.22%
)
Post# of 96905
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (5) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (5) Next 10 Prev Next

zombywolf

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 191
Posts 14523
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/06/2003

zombywolf

Re: BrokeAgent post# 74988

Saturday, 11/30/2019 8:59:48 AM

Saturday, November 30, 2019 8:59:48 AM

Post# of 96905
I believe that avenue for appeals is closed. Going to the PTAB (and CAFC) eliminated patent invalidity for appeal. VHC, for example, didnt have patents reviewed by the PTAB prior to trials. As a result, Apple was able to take them there and get the patent(s) invalidated. Not so here. Our case now is whether the patents are infringed- patents can be valid, but not infringed. Not sure I know of a case where a jury verdict was overturned in appeal determining that valid patents were infringed. Usually it is the patent itself that is determined to be invalid, not the infringement.

All information provided is the opinion of this poster from review of information in the public domain.

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (5) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (5) Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up