ITS TIME FOR VRINGO TO UPHOLD ITS SHAREHOLDERS INTEREST [View instapost]
9 Jurors didnt get enough help from Judge Jackson or from court while they are estimating the damages. FYI these jurors are normal citizens with limited IQ most of them not very good at math. hell who knows how to do all those calculations correctly most of them who had only dealt with 5/6 digits(100k) in thier lifetime.
Partly this is VRNG mistake aswell to not show them in presentations/slides as to how to calculate the damages and royalties.
Judge jackon didnt help them either by saying look at the evidence.
atleast jurors should have asked some help to calculate the damages correctly when they are not sure.
In the end VRNG longs got the hit with damage already done as Jurors clerical mistake cannot be corrected as they are already excused.
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
VRNG has 425 exhibits and Google has 245 exhibits that they want to use during the trial. Even if Jury cuts the Royalty rate half 1.75%-2% is still huge.
Vringo Vs. Google: Judge Jackson Strikes And Limits Google's Expert Testimony [View article]
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE BRIEFING FOR I/P ENGINE’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF JUDGE LEONARD’S RULING ON I/P ENGINE’S THIRD MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
Defendants respond to Plaintiff’s Motion to Expedite Briefing for I/P Engine’s Motion for Review of Judge Leonard’s Ruling on I/P Engine’s Third Motion for Discovery Sanctions by stating that they do not oppose and, accordingly, will respond to the underlying motion on or before 2pm on October 15, 2012. >>> Google will respond on VRNG motion to expedite briefing on Third motion for Discovery sanctions. VRNG filed this last week.
2) MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF EXHIBIT 1 TO THE O’BRIEN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered in this matter on January 23, 2012 (Dkt. 85) (“Protective Order”), Defendants Google Inc., Target Corporation, IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannet Co., Inc. and AOL Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), respectfully move this Court for entry of the attached Order permitting Defendants to file under seal Portions of Exhibit 1 to the O’Brien Declaration in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions and to Strike Portions of Dr. Frieder’s Second Updated Expert Report (“Portions of O’Brien Dec. Ex. 1”). Grounds and authorities for this Motion are set forth in Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, Defendants attach a Proposed Order as Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing parties. >>Google is asking to seal Exhibit 1 and asking Judge to AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT.AND TO STRIKE
3)CONSENT MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF CONSENT MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING OF DEFENDANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORT IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT’S OCTOBER 9 ORDER
>>Google is saying VRNG supplemental expert report supplements on issues beyond the authority granted by court.If Judge denies this it is Huge for VRNG.
4)Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google wants Exhibit 1 to be sealed untill 45 days after a final order is entered , or unless case is appealed. Google dont want this information public
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE BRIEFING FOR I/P ENGINE’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF JUDGE LEONARD’S RULING ON I/P ENGINE’S THIRD MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
Defendants respond to Plaintiff’s Motion to Expedite Briefing for I/P Engine’s Motion for Review of Judge Leonard’s Ruling on I/P Engine’s Third Motion for Discovery Sanctions by stating that they do not oppose and, accordingly, will respond to the underlying motion on or before 2pm on October 15, 2012. >>> Google will respond on VRNG motion to expedite briefing on Third motion for Discovery sanctions. VRNG filed this last week.
2) MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF EXHIBIT 1 TO THE O’BRIEN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered in this matter on January 23, 2012 (Dkt. 85) (“Protective Order”), Defendants Google Inc., Target Corporation, IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannet Co., Inc. and AOL Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), respectfully move this Court for entry of the attached Order permitting Defendants to file under seal Portions of Exhibit 1 to the O’Brien Declaration in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions and to Strike Portions of Dr. Frieder’s Second Updated Expert Report (“Portions of O’Brien Dec. Ex. 1”). Grounds and authorities for this Motion are set forth in Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, Defendants attach a Proposed Order as Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing parties. >>Google is asking to seal Exhibit 1 and asking Judge to AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT.AND TO STRIKE
3)CONSENT MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF CONSENT MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING OF DEFENDANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORT IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT’S OCTOBER 9 ORDER
>>Google is saying VRNG supplemental expert report supplements on issues beyond the authority granted by court.If Judge denies this it is Huge for VRNG.
4)Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google wants Exhibit 1 to be sealed untill 45 days after a final order is entered , or unless case is appealed. Google dont want this information public.
ITS TIME FOR VRINGO TO UPHOLD ITS SHAREHOLDERS INTEREST [View instapost]
Partly this is VRNG mistake aswell to not show them in presentations/slides as to how to calculate the damages and royalties.
Judge jackon didnt help them either by saying look at the evidence.
atleast jurors should have asked some help to calculate the damages correctly when they are not sure.
In the end VRNG longs got the hit with damage already done as Jurors clerical mistake cannot be corrected as they are already excused.
ITS TIME FOR VRINGO TO UPHOLD ITS SHAREHOLDERS INTEREST [View instapost]
they just cut/paste what ever jurors gave them no mentioning if the figures are correct or not.
VRINGO THE UNDERDOG IS READY TO GIVE KNOCKOUT PUNCH TO GOOGLE [View instapost]
Weekend Trial Analysis: This Comes Down To Google Management [View instapost]
Vringo Vs. Google: Vringo Executes A Pincer Movement [View article]
Finally The Seeking Alpha Article About VRNG You Have Been Waiting For!! Well Not Really.... [View instapost]
Finally The Seeking Alpha Article About VRNG You Have Been Waiting For!! Well Not Really.... [View instapost]
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
Final Pretrial Conference
http://bit.ly/QJS9Rd
Vringo Vs. Google: Judge Jackson Strikes And Limits Google's Expert Testimony [View article]
ENGINE’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF JUDGE LEONARD’S RULING ON I/P
ENGINE’S THIRD MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
Defendants respond to Plaintiff’s Motion to Expedite Briefing for I/P Engine’s Motion
for Review of Judge Leonard’s Ruling on I/P Engine’s Third Motion for Discovery Sanctions by
stating that they do not oppose and, accordingly, will respond to the underlying motion on or
before 2pm on October 15, 2012.
>>> Google will respond on VRNG motion to expedite briefing on Third motion for Discovery sanctions. VRNG filed this last week.
2) MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF EXHIBIT 1 TO THE O’BRIEN DECLARATION IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE
PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT
Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered in this matter on
January 23, 2012 (Dkt. 85) (“Protective Order”), Defendants Google Inc., Target Corporation,
IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannet Co., Inc. and AOL Inc. (collectively “Defendants”),
respectfully move this Court for entry of the attached Order permitting Defendants to file under
seal Portions of Exhibit 1 to the O’Brien Declaration in Support of Defendants’ Motion for
Sanctions and to Strike Portions of Dr. Frieder’s Second Updated Expert Report (“Portions of
O’Brien Dec. Ex. 1”). Grounds and authorities for this Motion are set forth in Defendants’
Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, Defendants attach
a Proposed Order as
Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to
Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a
final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be
returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google is asking to seal Exhibit 1 and asking Judge to AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT.AND TO STRIKE
3)CONSENT MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF CONSENT MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING OF DEFENDANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORT IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT’S OCTOBER 9 ORDER
>>Google is saying VRNG supplemental expert report supplements on issues beyond the authority granted by court.If Judge denies this it is Huge for VRNG.
4)Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to
Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a
final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be
returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google wants Exhibit 1 to be sealed untill 45 days after a final order is entered , or unless case is appealed. Google dont want this information public
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
ENGINE’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF JUDGE LEONARD’S RULING ON I/P
ENGINE’S THIRD MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
Defendants respond to Plaintiff’s Motion to Expedite Briefing for I/P Engine’s Motion
for Review of Judge Leonard’s Ruling on I/P Engine’s Third Motion for Discovery Sanctions by
stating that they do not oppose and, accordingly, will respond to the underlying motion on or
before 2pm on October 15, 2012.
>>> Google will respond on VRNG motion to expedite briefing on Third motion for Discovery sanctions. VRNG filed this last week.
2) MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF EXHIBIT 1 TO THE O’BRIEN DECLARATION IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE
PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT
Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered in this matter on
January 23, 2012 (Dkt. 85) (“Protective Order”), Defendants Google Inc., Target Corporation,
IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannet Co., Inc. and AOL Inc. (collectively “Defendants”),
respectfully move this Court for entry of the attached Order permitting Defendants to file under
seal Portions of Exhibit 1 to the O’Brien Declaration in Support of Defendants’ Motion for
Sanctions and to Strike Portions of Dr. Frieder’s Second Updated Expert Report (“Portions of
O’Brien Dec. Ex. 1”). Grounds and authorities for this Motion are set forth in Defendants’
Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, Defendants attach
a Proposed Order as
Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to
Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a
final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be
returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google is asking to seal Exhibit 1 and asking Judge to AND TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF DR. FRIEDER’S SECOND UPDATED EXPERT REPORT.AND TO STRIKE
3)CONSENT MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF CONSENT MOTION FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING OF DEFENDANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AND TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT REPORT IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT’S OCTOBER 9 ORDER
>>Google is saying VRNG supplemental expert report supplements on issues beyond the authority granted by court.If Judge denies this it is Huge for VRNG.
4)Exhibit 1 and are filing separately a Public Notice of Defendants’ Motion to
Seal. Defendants request that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a
final order is entered and requests that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be
returned to counsel for the filing parties.
>>Google wants Exhibit 1 to be sealed untill 45 days after a final order is entered , or unless case is appealed. Google dont want this information public.
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
Things To Watch Out For VRNG Shareholders [View instapost]
Vringo Vs. Google: Judge Jackson Strikes And Limits Google's Expert Testimony [View article]
Vringo Vs. Google: Judge Jackson Strikes And Limits Google's Expert Testimony [View article]
http://stks.co/lCW4
http://stks.co/cCBw
http://stks.co/hD4S
http://stks.co/cCBx