Replies to post #29623 on UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[Goodbuddy4863]

Now...We got the same thing We had last week.

Somebody claiming We don't own ChanBond.

Maybe We should have made a sticky out of the Post that confirmed it, huh?

New Investors either need to do their Homework and make up their own mind to invest.

I don't care if they buy shares or if they don't.

It's their Loss.

$$$$ UOIP $$$$

[Goodbuddy4863]

Now...I need to Ask You what I asked GS1.

Just substitute RPX for Cisco[which is decided].

How long does RPX have to appeal this decision from the PTAB?

63 days from 5/25/2017

Are they allowed to do that?
__________________________________________________
Quote:
III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we determine that RPX has not shown by a
preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–31 are unpatentable.

IV. ORDER
It is
ORDERED claims 1–31 of the ’822 patent are not held unpatentable;
and
FURTHER ORDERED that, because this is a Final Written Decision,
parties to the proceeding seeking judicial review of the decision must
comply with the notice and service requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 90.2.
__________________________________________________

TIA Mama

$$$$ UOIP $$$$