Replies to post #48186 on Voip Pal Com Inc (VPLM)

[GTCar]

Entirely inaccurate, the first panel offered no ruling, they reviewed the initial facts and proceeded to institute the IPR trial on the basis that there "may be" a possibility that one or more claims may be invalidated, it proceeded through the process of both parties presenting evidence, "expert testimony" and the panel eventually concluded that there was no reason to cancel any one claim thus there is only one decision at hand, the one that found the patents valid on all claims. Just because a judge allows a case to go to trial does not mean he has rendered a decision... He/She is merely making it known there is a need for greater information...

[Positive NRG]

That is completely incorrect. 1st panel decided to “institute”, which means to basically accept it as a case to be investigated by the PTAB. Case was laid out. 1st panel was found to have conflicts of interest and was succinctly replaced. The new panel, with no conflicts of interests, then made a RULING on the validity of the patents using all of the case info handed to them.

There was NO REVERSAL of the initial decision to institute the IPR (even though in all fairness there should have been). And there was NO INFLUENCE OR COERCEMENT!!

[Positive NRG]

Just to make it absolutely CLEAR. The 2nd panel did NOT rule “not to institute”, the IPR WAS INSTITUTED AND THEN THE CASE WAS RULED “IN FAVOR OF VP THAT THE CLAIMS MADE AGAINST THEM BY APPLE WERE INVALID”. They are NOT THE SAME THING!!!