Replies to post #24875 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[88888]

When might we hear something on WiFione?

[BigDawgGMoney]

I think people need to be careful here not to assume if the wifione case is won - WDDD wins.

There is always nuance and legal definitions to be aware of and while I don't think you're suggesting directly that a win in the wifione case means a guarantee here, those reading should not interpret it as such. A positive yes but my read of the statute also creates a debate for WDDD/Bungie that WDDD will still have to overcome (depending on the detail of the ruling of course!)

Key issues

35 USC Section 315(b) states—An inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent.

Thus, for WDDD we must be able to argue that WDDD is a real party in interest (still), or a 'privy' to the petitioner. Therefore, from my read there will still be a hurdle to clear.

Here's some info on the definition of 'privy to the petitioner'.

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/02/05/inter-partes-review-who-is-a-privy-of-the-petitioner/id=47812/