Replies to post #39013 on UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[sexysamir]

Technically yes they will still have to prove it but don’t think for a second part of the argument won’t include the fact that Cisco admitted to using the tech during the IPR process.

[zombywolf]

Absent a settlement, Chanbond will need a court judgement to enforce payment. After patents have been confirmed as valid, then infringement of those patents has to be established in a court, not a hearing. So far, most of the appeals that the Cisco 13 have dealt with are through the PTAB. That is where (in addition to the CAFC) the Cisco 13 would go in an infringement court loss to appeal the validity of the patent. But infringement and validity are two different things- you could have a valid patent and not infringed, or have a patent infringed and the patent gets invalidated by the PTAB on appeal. The Cisco 13 dont owe a dime legally until a court says so and appeals are finished. Of course, they can settle beforehand, but taking cases like this through multiple courts and hearings for years has been the norm for IP enforcement for small companies vs big ones.