Dustin Moore's  Instablog

Dustin Moore
Send Message
Dustin Moore is a researcher and analyst focusing on overlooked and undervalued investments. He enjoys analyzing under-the-radar companies with massive upside potential and those with favorable risk/reward ratios. On Twitter! @dustinrmoore https://twitter.com/dustinrmoore
My blog:
My SA Instablog
  • Petitioning For Reconsideration Of The Decision Regarding The Original Decision... 2 comments
    Dec 23, 2013 1:01 PM | about stocks: VHC

    It makes one a bit dizzy trying to keep up with the Patent Office in regards to VirnetX's patents.

    Last week, I wrote about the reopening of the Cisco reexaminations of VirnetX's 504 and 211 patents. But meanwhile, the Director allowed Apple's examination of the same patents to continue on, citing no examiner error during the original prosecution.

    Late last week however, VirnetX rechallenged the Director to reopen the prosecution for at least the same reasons it did for the Cisco case. If the Director will not reopen the reexamination, VirnetX pleads with the Director to at a minimum to enter VirnetX's expert testimony into the record.

    So, in essence, these are petitions for reconsideration of the decisions regarding the original decisions. Yikes!

    Both documents were combined into one document for convenience and can be viewed here.

    Stocks: VHC
Back To Dustin Moore's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (2)
Track new comments
  • Dustin Moore
    , contributor
    Comments (277) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » "...the Director should reconsider its 11/4/ 13 Decision here and reopen prosecution for the similar reasons the Director reopened prosecution in the [Cisco reexam] Decision. Doing so will ensure consistency across all matters, presenting the same issues before the Office."
    23 Dec 2013, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • Dustin Moore
    , contributor
    Comments (277) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Also, "VirnetX provided 'good and sufficient reasons why the Supplemental Declaration is necessary and was not presented earlier,' so it complied with 37 CFR 1.116e. VirnetX respectfully requests that the Director reconsider the Decision and enter the Supplemental Declaration into the record."
    23 Dec 2013, 02:45 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

  • $GOMO started day down only a bit. Now off -7.9%
    Oct 20, 2014
  • Kudos to the investor who snagged $MARA shares sub $13.
    Oct 9, 2014
  • 21Vianet Exposer's Bogus Exhibits $VNET http://seekingalpha.com/a/1hf2z
    Sep 13, 2014
More »

Latest Comments


Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.