Thanks for your replies.
Here is Ms Hendrick's comment on the Seeking Alpha article
ceo@smartmetric.com Comment (1)
There are actually three current lawsuits by SmartMetric against the large credit card companies. The first lawsuit was filed in March 2010 against Mastercard and Visa and specifically accused their contactless card systems (Mastercard's PayPass and Visa's payWave) of infringing the '464 patent. The second lawsuit was filed in December 2010 against AmEx accusing its contactless card system (ExpressPay) of infringing.
Then, in August 2011, SmartMetric filed a third lawsuit, this one against Mastercard and Visa regarding their credit card systems that involve inserting cards into card readers.
All three cases were filed by SmartMetric in the Federal District Court in Los Angeles and are before the same judge.
SmartMetric, Inc, holds this is intrinsically misleading. Yes it is true that the company did originally have initially 3 lawsuits but it removed these lawsuits. It then immediately set about filing a new law suit dealing with CONTACT cards. At the time the Banks were stating publicly and privately that they had no interest in introducing Contact Cards in the United States and with out even blinking said that even Contactless Cards would be a very small part of there business. So the Company SmartMetric, Inc. took them on face value and accepted what they said. SmartMetric, Inc. However did its own research and found it was being seriously mislead. So it withdrew its limited lawsuit and corrected its position at law. SmartMetric, Inc. after withdrawing it's lawsuit dealing with the misinformation being feed it from the Card Companies. SmartMetric, Inc. then filed a New Law Suit against the plaintiffs. Namely an appeal against law suit against American Express, Visa and MasterCard. SO SMARTMETRIC, INC. has withdrawn all of its it's past lawsuits. Now that we, SmartMetric, have WON ON Contact Cards and WON ON Networks ( including ATM MACHINES & RETAIL POINT OF SALE OUTLETS) for contact cards we have now a clear run.
"In May 2011, the District Court judge issued an order interpreting various terms in the patent over which the parties disagreed as to their meaning. In light of that decision, which construed the patent to require the insertion of a card into a data card reader, SmartMetric conceded that the contactless card systems did not infringe. However, SmartMetric disagreed with the District Court's interpretation of the patent and filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals."
In May 2011, the District Court judge issued an order interpreting various terms in the patent over which the parties disagreed as to their meaning. In light of that decision, which construed the patent to require the insertion of a card into a data card reader, SmartMetric conceded that the contactless card systems did not infringe. However, SmartMetric disagreed with the District Court's interpretation of the patent and filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals.
So SmartMetric, Inc. immediately filed an appeal in the Federal appeals court concerning the use of the SmartMetric, Inc. Patent now it has been established that it is truly in violation of
