The trials have nothing to do with patent validity. They have to do with patent infringement. Many here have to learn that the hard way. Validity and infringement are 2 different things. Vplm has sued for infringement. The patents are already valid and have been since the day they were born. Just because the defendants have tried, as one tactic, to have patents invalidated, doesn't mean the court is not tasked with finding infringement or no infringement. The court is not tasked with finding validity or invalidity. No need unless someone is still claiming invalidity. It's a out infringement.....ie, whether or not the defendants are using the patents. That is what is what is on the trial table. Infringement is what vplm has sued for, period. No vplm patents have ever been invalid. They are all valid patents and I think the only thing ever gained by vplm in all those IPR positive outcomes is perhaps estoppel, ie, that any of the invalidity claims brought up before in all those many IPR trials, cannot be brought up again, as they are settled without predudice essentially. I think that ship has sailed in terms of any defendants trying being up any more invalidity claims. So regardless of all the delays, the trials are all about infringement and not validity. In my opinion, vplm will not be able to prove infringement. In my opinion their sole hope is to scare the defendants into settling. It's possible, I suppose, but I don't think they can do so...........and THAT.......would be the ONLY reason there has been no settlements so far......because the defendants KNOW they're not infringing. If that turns out to be the case, then it all comes together and makes sense. I think the defendants thought trying to show invalidity was simply a shortcut for them or so they thought. Most of that was done via the IPRs and the IPRs were designed to to be cheaper and faster than regular trials that take longer and cost more. They had to do something or be found guilty by default. So my prediction, which I hope I'm wrong about, is that come February, there will simply be more monkey wrenches thrown and more trial date pushbacks.
All my commentary is to be considered as my personal opinions, to which I am entitled. And there is no proof of said opinions unless I offer it in the comments.
