Replies to post #31882 on Worlds Inc (WDDD)

[abcd12]

Yes but they agreed with ptab and found the patents un patentable...
to me this is not in our favor... correct me if I'm wrong.

You need to find out RPI issue of Westerngeco and compare it to Worlds before drawing any conclusion.

The court has a contract as evidence that point to a relationship between Bungie and Activision, and Bungie's self admission by its attorney during the oral hearing that it does not have evidence to show that Activision is NOT a RPI. How is this compare with Westerngeco's RPI evidences?

The positive thing about this ruling is that it was reviewed under de novo standard, which would eliminate possibility of a remand decree by the court.

[abcd12]

Our judges "in order to vacate" must first decide they want to look at the case as "de novo" AND then find/discovery of "real party of interest" like ptab should have, then decide on the time bar issue, then decide on the patentability issue with lost claims? Or does the discovery and time bar issue supersede the rest if the decide to just deem ATVI as RPI? Sounds pretty layered and makes me think remand... unless I'm confused, that final written decision from westernGeco does not help us.
even though the cases seem pretty different who thinks otherwise? Anyone else have better explanation... or opinion on what path our judges may take/ possible scenarios?

I don't have details about Westerngeco case. But here what I know about Worlds.

During the oral hearing, the CFAC panel interest was primarily about RPI issues. There were no technical questions or technical discussions about the patent claims. If I recall correctly, patent claims were said in passing and discussed in term of Worlds' strategy as to why only 3 instead of 6 claims were disputed by Worlds.

My impression from the oral hearing is the this panel wanted to get to the bottom of the RPI issue BEFORE deciding on the patent claims, and IMO, the upcoming court decision will address the only RPI issue, and the issue about patent claim can be subsequently relevant only if Bungie is not time-barred.