Based on publicly available materials, the Non-Parties claim that they have a right to intervene in this action because certain alleged deficiencies
in Unified’s corporate governance allegedly leave ChanBond’s authority to act “open to question.”
(Mot. at 10-12.) The Non-Parties acknowledge that these alleged defects were publicly disclosed at least as early as 2015. (Mot. at 10.)
Yet, the Non-Parties took no action to address their concerns when Unified disclosed these alleged deficiencies in public securities filings, when
ChanBond filed patent litigation actions in 2015, or when the public settlement of those actions was announced in 2021.
Instead, having sat silently for years while Mr. Carter and ChanBond bore the risks and burdens of a hotly contested patent litigation campaign, the Non-Parties lied in
wait until March 21, 2022, to seek to intervene in this action to stake a claim to settlement proceeds to which they have
no legal right based on alleged corporate governance deficiencies about which they have known for years. The Motion is not timely, and the Court should deny it.
2. The Non-Parties’ Have No Interest in This Litigation
The Non-Parties contend they are permitted to intervene because Unified has a “legal interest
in the settlement funds at issue in this case.” (D.I. 34 at 14.) This argument is incorrect as a matter
of law. Unified does not have any cognizable legal interest in the settlement funds and the Non-
Parties do not identify any. To the contrary, this action is about ChanBond’s (and other parties’)
competing claims to the settlement funds. The Non-Parties concede that the interest they seek to
vindicate on behalf of Unified to the settlement funds is derivative of ChanBond’s claims to the settlement funds –
and exists only because ChanBond is its wholly owned subsidiary.
