Replies to Post #25502 onUnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

Replies to #25502 on UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

05/20/17 2:27 PM

#25503 RE: lineItemVeto #25502

Hardly..

Links to Cisco Petitions failure vs ChanBond:

https://www.law360.com/articles/907966/ptab-nixes-six-cisco-ipr-petitions-over-networking-patents

http://www.natlawreview.com/article/chanbond-avoids-institution-six-cisco-ipr-petitions

------------------------------------------------------

Settlement coming the 12th where all the parties have joined together to submit a joint report (know they owe?):

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint status report and proposed revised schedule to June 12, 2017 - filed by Atlantic Broadband Group, LLC, Bright House Networks, LLC, CSC Holdings, LLC, Cable One, Inc., Cablevision Systems Corporation, Cequel Communications Holdings I, LLC, Cequel Communications, LLC, Charter Communications, Inc., Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Comcast Corporation, Cox Communications, Inc., Mediacom Communications Corporation, RCN Telecom Services, LLC, Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC, Time Warner Cable Inc., WaveDivision Holdings, LLC, WideOpen West Finance, LLC. (Ying, Jennifer) Modified on 5/15/2017

-----------------------------------------------------

All coming together ChanBond was getting bullied if you read the 10Q. So ChanBond sold its patents to UOIP to leverage the CEO Rob Howe's status to attract a large Patent Attorney. And Cisco was hired by the cable companies as a non party to discredit the tech, and failed.