Replies to post #134792 on Voip Pal Com Inc (VPLM)

[sunspotter]

This is a response from the folks masquerading as VPLM’s lawyers to the application for fees and costs that Albright encouraged the defendants in this case to file.

But as the case was so devoid of merit, they’ll be on the hook for the full amount.

https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/c5509492-05c4-466e-a478-1c6e83c9bde1/Rule%20298.pdf

[chazzy1]

Thanks GreenBackClub. I presume that this motion hearing, which is set for 2/21/2025, is Judge Albright's formal response to Hudnell's motion for reconsideration. I would opine that if the judge were simply going to reject Hudnell's argument, there would have been no need to convene a formal hearing involving both defendants. He would have simply responded to Hudnell's motion for reconsideration with "motion denied."
Therefore, I take this as a positive development for VOIP-PAL. JMHO.

[straightword]

How many times have we heard about hearings like this that produce nothing. Get back to me when they get financial judgements that are in-line with the "billions and billions of ongoing" infringements that the CEO has spoken about. If not then it's a complete failure and confirmation that the patents aren't worth near as claimed.