Patent Plays

Long/short equity
Patent Plays
Long/short equity
Contributor since: 2013
Company: Patenplays
There was never a problem with funding the ZTE lawsuit thru conclusion. The public portions of the settlement by simple reasoning indicates there is far more here that management cannot disclose in regards to the settlement.
The terms of agreement will be remain unknown and investors will have to determine the true value of the deal based off filed 10-Q's.
The Asus Litigation remains in play for near term growth
I agree with this statement and take note....
"ZTE's payment of $21.5M was almost equal to what VRNG spent on litigation"
The Royalty agreement would be confidential and binding. Its obvious this is what occurred. We are adding to our position.
"...entered into a Confidential Settlement and License Agreement."
Confidential means non-disclose.
@Justin- I would have loved this article to be based solely on this:
"Throw in the number of upcoming catalysts over the next week - possible settlement with Lowes..."
Looking forward to your next...PP
I would love to read this again, after the grammar errors have been removed.
Worlds is at Hearing today in Federal Court with Activision Blizzard concerning the Alice v CLS challenge.
I expect that Judge Caspar may rule in less than 30 days given the Calendar of court events arranged for Worlds trial next year.
Our review shows significant differences over the Prior Art that will allow Worlds to win the PTAB challenge. The MSJ over Alice concerns is also favored to Worlds. The Supreme Court was addressing a Business Method over Software Patents in Alice v. CLS, not a Technical Solution answering a problem with Software over a Wide Area Network.
We believe Federal Judge Caspar can and will make that connection in the ruling, and look forward to the February 2016 discovery concerning the Markman.
@Justin
I would look to Ericsson as an example. Your estimates are very low and do not account for future sales and or a potential paid up license. If ZTE thought for one moment they could settle this lawsuit for $80-$120 million they would have already done so.
@IP Hawk
Technically Vringo has the full 30 days to seek a Rule 44 refile on the Supreme Court denial to hear the Google case. Its possible but not probable it would be granted. I'd be interested in seeing how you arrived at those potential settlement numbers for Vringo v. ZTE in Europe, specifically the $80 million to $120 million. Can you elaborate?
The Supreme Court has declared war on Intellectual Property. Yesterdays action amounts to blind deference to the constitutional protections that defend what makes this nation an economic powerhouse. I venture to say SCOTUS has done more damage yesterday than 1 million combined Chinese and Russian hackers on their best day over 10 years.
Vringo has the right plan. Pursue patent infringement cases in countries that value Intellectual Property and defends those rights with a stalwart judicial.
Something we don't have in the United States.
@Tech
I completely agree with your comments, item for item.
I believe in Vringo's IP, still I've negatively commented of the extravagant management perks, pay and expenses Vringo execs enjoy. CEO Perlman and Alex Berger came from Hudson Bay Capital, a notorious SEC sanctioned Investment Banker. I would rather borrow money from Fidel Castro and risk Federal Penalties, than deal with Hudson Bay.
Vringo already has an incontestable win "in-hand" at the United Kingdom Courts. With a clock ticking on count down to the Judges damage award, Vringo will be cashing in on past present and to a certain extent profit thru association on future sales.
Those numbers will come in 1st quarter I believe. Still we have the "Hail Mary" appeal (SCOTUS; IP Engine v Google) that is less than 60 days now.
That has the potentially to make a lot of millionaires, overnight, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Vringo. I'm speaking to anyone sitting on 100,000 shares or more of Vringo Common stock.
Worlds is not on that short timeline, so yes Vringo is more near term but I also think Worlds has the potential to get there.
@financemc
The brief will cite relevant case law in support of the Judges decision to make certain declaratory rulings fundamental to establishing that ZTE did violate the NDA in a manner consistent with Vringo's assertions.
There are a few media channels that cannot be bought and sold by Google.
Thank you R.
The possibility is very real that the comments posted here in the last 24 hours may become admissible as evidence, should it be discovered that Stocktwits was financially induced by Google to eliminate these posters.
Its a very real possibility. Granted that Yahoo's portal provides an easy forum for users to gain quote data and offer comments vis vie ST. It's novelty however is not irreplaceable. Market Feed Data Streams are very cheap to buy and Server Space is getting cheaper by the week.
I think Howard's formula can be replicated and I will reach out to VRNG24 and be happy to discuss financing the same.
Unfortunately it will require closing my Robinhood Financial Account. Sorry Howard.
@LYogi- Agreed.
There are a couple of scenarios and possibilities.
1. The SEC (Securities Exchange Commission) is investigating ZTE for securities manipulation, as a result of Vringo's Exhibits detailing Stocktwits as a medium for ZTE promoters.
2. Stocktwits may have been notified, on advice of counsel, to remove any user id's that had awareness to ZTE's actions.
3. Stocktwits itself may have liability exposure for failing to censure ZTE Promoters.
The SEC doesn't disclose information on its investigations. We will just have to wait and see. As for my last post on ST I'm rather glad it went out supporting a link to this article , protecting the voice of free speech.
Yes this is very odd. This could be ZTE filing an injunction on Stocktwits. I would think the whole site could be effected.
Coincidentally, I was just suspended from Stocktwits for asking a question????
"Your StockTwits account was suspended for violation of our House Rules regarding:
Spam: Adding $TICKER cashtags to a message or link that has little or nothing to do with the $TICKER (also known as Ticker Spam).
Your Message: $VRNG Hopefully ST reconsider V24, majority of his posts direct from the Fed Courts. How is that suspicious? US Federal Courts? Confused
To get your account reinstated reply to this email.
Regards,
StockTwits"
It would seem that Stocktwits has some internal problems going on. Surely banning someone because they asked a question is not an advocate of free speech.
A very large amount of revenue that Nokia can claim rests with the success of Vringo(NASDAQ; VRNG) patent infringement claims against ZTE Corp. Nokia stands to gain 20% of the earnings as Nokia licensed those patents to Vringo under terms.
Now ZTE of China in Federal Court documents Friday in the Southern District of New York in Discovery Documents stated they would engage in tactics to manipulate Vringo share price to produce a lower Royalty.
http://bit.ly/1KKR4oM
I have filed a request on White House. Gov to ask the Obama administration to investigate ZTE for Securities manipulation of a US Company. Please sign my petition. http://1.usa.gov/1DZGvt7
US Corps deserve fair and equal access to US Financial Markets.
Enough is Enough. I submitted a petition to the White House today to have the DOJ and SEC investigate ZTE for Securities manipulation. If you agree sign the petition. If not read Fridays discovery.
Petition: http://1.usa.gov/1DZGvt7
Enough is enough. I've launched a petition to the Whitehouse to require the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate ZTE for Securities Manipulation. If you have doubts read the discovery that was submitted Friday to Federal SDNY.
Sign the petition if you agree. http://1.usa.gov/1DZGvt7
Like Ericsson (ERIC:Nasdaq) ZTE will eventually settle with Vringo. The financing last year accounted for this expenditure. The NDRC NDA lawsuit could be escalating a faster settlement.
No one (other than Ericsson) has come close to what Vringo has accomplished with ZTE.
Nokia never successfully forced injunctions on ZTE, nor did they win in the UK or Germany as Vringo has done. There's no doubt that Vringo has been more successful litigating ZTE than Nokia ever was.
Keep in mind Vringo has won in the UK and its only a matter of months before a determination of damages is awarded. Many feel that this will far exceed what Vringo could have collected by just doing a Global License, and through a settlement, essentially forgiving years of infringement as it pertains to the UK.
Congrats to Thom Kidrin CEO Worlds for a great Markman Result. Looking forward to trial dates next month. More to follow.
@Justin
I'm flying later today and have some airport time. Maybe SA or Benzinga.
Cheers.
@Justin
Ultimately everyone on this board wants a GVR. The question is will they get it?
I can think of one case that matches Vringo's well- and I'd love to see Dan or Steve comment to it on this forum.
@redwoodinvestor
China is protecting ZTE as they have a vested interest as shareholders. That protection may extend as influence among law firms but the recent failures at SDNY and other Federal Venues suggest its not performing well.
Delisting from NASDAQ Capital Markets to NASDAQ OTC will be unnoticed by most, if not all investors (the Stock Symbol doesn't change). Most funds that apportion to the Russell Microcap have set rules that deny under $1 equities regardless.
@Justin
The SCOTUS Appeal is the most compelling short-term reason to own this stock.
Historically all major highs were reached on the District Court decisions. Likewise the Court of Appeals (13th Circuit) delivered the lows.
Should SCOTUS order Oral Arguments or issue a GVR, Vringo's market capitalization would easily exceed all previous highs.
This equates to a 60 cents stock with the potential to exceed $5-12 in a short term window of less than 90 days. You don't see that everyday, and I am hardpressed to find any such example sitting before the high court now.

(A GVR order is a type of order issued on occasion by the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the Court grants a petition for certiorari, vacates the decision of the court below, and remands the case for further proceedings (hence the acronym by which they are known).
The NDA case was filed as a proactive counter measure against ZTE regulatory ally China based NDRC. ZTE is suspected of using the NDA to penalize Vringo by proxying an agency that is best compared to our Federal Trade Commission, in pursuit of attaching a massive fine similar to the Qualcomm decision.
Not covered in the story and rarely mentioned is the forthcoming announcement expected out of the United Kingdom over Vringo's '919 patent victory against ZTE. UK Justice Birss is expected to award Vringo percentage based royalties dating back to September 8, 2010.
ZTE is liable for all LTE 3G 4G infrastructure builds made in the UK during that time period. Suggested royalties mentioned in court exceed 2%. The question is how much and not "if", as the ruling is beyond appeal in the United Kingdom.
Reference the amended answer in the response above.
Vringo filed counter-claims asking the US FEDERAL COURTS to require ZTE to accept FRAND TERMS as outlined should Vringo prevail. Including all attorneys fees from ALL legal actions filed around the world.
By seeking US COURT review ZTE encumbers ZTE-US held Assets over foreign judgments. This could create new problems for ZTE.
Yes Hercules undoubtedly allowed Saudi Aramco to exit. My guess is the S1 amended that was filed 72 hours later suggests the Saudi's traded contract penalties and an early exist for $400 million preferred equity in Hercules.