Seeking Alpha

Chris Grunewald

View as an RSS Feed
View Chris Grunewald's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    A little bit of both I think, Alan.

    On all of the social forums I know of concerning VRNG (Vringo FF, ST, YMB, SA, Twitter, etc), many people with irrationally huge positions are waiting hands and knees everyday for a ruling on a company with no real catalysts in the near future (being lawsuits, as that is their biz model.) Will these people wait like they are now during an appeal (approximately 12 months of hearing nothing)? Will the workaround significantly decrease future damages (if JJ deems them appropriate)? What will happen in the PTO? Uncertainty is what shorts crave, and uncertainty is rampant in VRNG.

    There are so high expectations in this stock, and expectations usually lead to disappointment. I really don't think the share price will correspond until a settlement/all appeals exhausted and the remedy appears in V's balance sheet. We'll see what happens.

    CG
    May 24 04:05 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    "There will be no stays in the Judicial process pending USPTO process. Sorry doesn't work that way here."

    -> 100% wrong. Staying the judicial process pending PTO re-examination is an option within the Court's discretion.

    page 1104, subset C. -> http://bit.ly/10aqzPL
    May 23 10:03 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    FYI--- Vermont Enacts The Nation's First Anti-Patent Trolling Law - via Forbes -> http://stks.co/dVG8 ; keep in mind Charles Schumer also recently introduced S. 866 -> http://bit.ly/10MVBNZ
    May 22 09:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Judge Jackson Still Ignore Google's Work-Around? [View article]
    DylanNYC,

    Maybe before the idea of a GOOG workaround came to fruition. Can you cite the above words in V's [822] Reply? I cannot find it.

    CG
    May 21 09:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Judge Jackson Still Ignore Google's Work-Around? [View article]
    A final District Court judgment is appealable by law to the corresponding appellate court (Federal Circuit in this case).
    May 21 09:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Judge Jackson Still Ignore Google's Work-Around? [View article]
    Workaround was introduced in G's [822] Response. I would have a hard time seeing how a material issue like that wouldn't be addressed before a ruling on [822]. We'll see what happens.

    Good luck with your investment.

    CG
    May 21 05:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Judge Jackson Still Ignore Google's Work-Around? [View article]
    What part about V asking for "a period for fact and potentially expert discovery of the redesign and a briefing schedule" confuses you, KevinPorter?
    May 21 05:29 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Judge Jackson Still Ignore Google's Work-Around? [View article]
    MA,

    Good article. I feel like you could make your points a bit clearer though, in addition to identifying yourself.. The Court isn't "required" to stay the proceedings to determine the legitimacy of a non-infringing workaround (what V is suggesting). The Reply was a good synopsis by V, but the elephant in the room is that IF the workaround is non-infringing, they are SOL. Plain and simple. The proceedings will most likely be halted in order for further discovery, which gives the PTO more time. It will be interesting to consider the relationship btwn the proposed discovery timeframe, the PTO/PTAB/FedCirc appeal process, and the USDC/FedCirc appeal process.

    In the end, this will most likely delay things even further, which is debatably might be what GOOG wanted to accomplish in the first place in order to buy even more time.

    CG
    May 21 05:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Hey Chris,

    Really appreciate your comments, sounds like you are familiar with the sector. However I think a lot of these junior potash miners, especially greenfield ones, are more in "endangered" places.. e.g., places with political trouble (Argentina comes to mind), extremely high CAPEX in the multi-billion dollar range, and/or non-optimal weather conditions (specifically the big 3 of Canada/Russia/Belarus).. Not to mention the fraud companies that throw out arbitrary numbers on how much potash is under their land..

    But when you look at a company like Prospect (maybe Passport too; I've just done more DD on Prospect), you have a junior miner fairly far along in the mining process in a very strategic place (for mining purposes) within a country that is very highly dependent on potash imports. The initial CAPEX is 1.3B, far less than competitors. If the management team of PGRX was a tad more competent (note the dilutions at very depressed prices and odd, if not downright bad, timing), I would feel a lot more comfortable.

    CG
    May 19 05:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    KP,

    "The USPTO automatically issues a rejection letter but it is non-final. This is STANDARD.

    Requesting a patent re-exam is like starting the patent application process all over again, so the patent is automatically rejected until the entire examination is completed"

    ->> 1.) These two statements contradict one another. Also, all claims aren't rejected, just the relevant ones that the aggregate IP of Culliss, Bowman, and Lashkari are deemed Prior Art to. Incidentally, the relevant claims of '664 have had SNQ's raised on that same aggregate IP.

    2.) It doesn't matter when the patents expire in this case. Look at Translogic. The patents expired well before the FedCir's affirmation of the USPTO's PTAB invalidity (nonpatentability) ruling. It's retroactive.

    3.) That's a very hopeful timeline for FedCir to wrap up their appeal process. The average time for a USDC patent infringement appeal to the FedCir, from disposition to determination, is approximately 11-12 months, and that's not taking into consideration cross appeals (which is happening in this case). Early summer 2014 is much more likely.

    But please, continue to tell me that I do not know anything and that the "fair value" of VRNG is in the double digits.

    CG
    May 16 02:31 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    well said marpha.
    May 16 01:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    he didn't really paraphrase me correctly..
    May 15 10:44 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    Hey Markman Advisors, good article. Although I have some criticisms:

    1.) In '664's case, the aggregate IP of Bowman, Culliss, and Lashkari are not yet prior art until proven so. That IP has raised five new Substantial New Questions of Patentability (SNQ's); the IP hasn't been deemed Prior Art yet.
    2.) Vringo has two months from the '420 final rejection date to submit a response to the PTO re: validation. If that doesn't work, then I'd suspect an appeal to PTAB.
    3.) It would help your credibility to give readers some insight about you / your group / etc. I agree with a lot of your work and think it is legitimate; however, your lack of disclosure is concerning and makes your work seem illegitimate by association.

    CG
    May 14 09:52 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Long Until Vringo's Verdict Against Google Pays Off? [View article]
    It's not me either.
    May 13 10:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Case & point!
    May 10 08:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
115 Comments
53 Likes