Replies to post #26492 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[AlphaInvestor8]

I question if legal counsel to WDDD was speaking to a shareholder because your commentary on that is FALSE sir

Regarding 101 challenges at the CAFC either by the judges or Bungie, that is out of the purview of both parties by law, ie it's not going to happen. I have confirmed this with Wayne Helge on a call today.

1. VRNG is a perfect example of how this statement cannot be correct, and that IGNORES the fact that ATVI brought it up at district court sir

ALL WHO WERE IN VRNG ARE AWARE BY FACT, 101 WAS NOT EVEN RAISED BY GOOGLE IN ITS FILINGS AT THE CAFC AND THE JUDGES RAISED IT SUA SPONTE (FOR THEM) IN ORALS

Your statement is 100% false sorry - and that precedent PROVES IT

Similarly, the appellate Judges cannot revisit and invalidate the claims that survived the IPR, that is also outside of their legal authority.

We have discussed the idea of a cross claim - I suggest you read about it and go back and read my posts on it, again we discussed this ad nauseum

So long as bungie challenges those claims that got through the courts will evaluate the full ruling. All you have to do is look at precedents sir and see where the CAFC has overturned validated claims in the past, which they have.


If you expect Bungie not to challenge/cross claim you are fooling yourself.

And if you spoke to WDDD legal counsel and they 'actually' told you that sir, you better dump your stock on Monday because they lack basic legal knowledge.

That is legal factual legal reality

The good thing is we should be able to see who is right when Bungie files tonight!

Happy weekend reading sir, you can apologize after you read it, and I will do the same if I am wrong ok?

How about that?

[AlphaInvestor8]

Oh and to add sir, on this comment of yours:

I have confirmed this with Wayne Helge on a call today.

Generally, legal counsel to public companies does not interact or discuss an ongoing case with random retail shareholders. By law they have to keep discussions between themselves and the company. Mr Helge would have told you to call Mr Kidrin, he would not have spoken to you or anyone outside WDDD about the case

On your comment of

the appellate Judges cannot revisit and invalidate the claims that survived the IPR, that is also outside of their legal authority.

I would suggest reading this carefully from Pacer and focus on the bolded area in particular

ORDER granting motion to extend time to file appellee/respondent/cross-appellant principal brief [22] filed by Appellee Bungie, Inc.; Bungie, Inc.'s response brief is due 08/25/2017. Service: 06/27/2017 by clerk. [442324]

I am not sure what your angle was here but it was incorrect.