Re: Long Term Strategy?
in response to
by
Mosaic ImmunoEngineering is a nanotechnology-based immunotherapy company developing therapeutics and vaccines to positively impact the lives of patients and their families.
Message: Re: Long Term Strategy?
Your Vote:
Did you know?
You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)
I agree completely. Now was that decision worth losing 100-150 million, and not to mention creating the doubt that exist today in future licensing activity. No. Got to be more coming. To date, considering all the licensing since the Dec. settlement, we are in the hole with the j's settlement. 13 million in legal fees. How much did we get from the J's? Not very much by the 10Q figures if you take in account all who are in there. As someone mentioned recently, if this is all we got why even honor the NDA, how much could we lose by breaking our silence? If we didn't get much from the J's would JW allow us to shake down other companies with licensing agreements and no transparancy? I think that is exactly what the T-3 settlement is about.They claim that they infringe have been negoiating for 14 months and can't reach an agreement.If they felt that the J's settlement was low, why bother to sue us.The willful infringment stops on the date when the suit is entered. Must be some big numbers coming.
Also another clue. ARM in their press release claim they are not infringing the 336 patent. Why hasn't Lectrone responded as he has done in the past with ARM's fictious claims in press releases.Perhaps they are trying to draw him out into saying something forbidden in the NDA. Again, if our settlement was so low, why all this effort? Their dismissal from the litigation had nothing to do with the 336:
(Reply) Note: dismissed without prejudice
(provided by Wolf)
ORDER AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LTD., ET AL.
Vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:05-CV-494
MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUS. CO.,
LTD., ET AL.
ORDER AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
On this day came on to be heard Plaintiffs' and Defendants'
Stipulation of Partial Judgment of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent
No. 5,784,584 ("the `584 patent") pursuant to F.R.C.P. 54(b). The
court, after considering the Stipulation, finds that good cause
exists and renders judgment as follows: Pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 54(b), this court finds that there is no just reason
for delay and renders judgment in favor of all defendants of non-
infringement of claim 29 of the `584 patent. In addition, the court
finds that there is no just reason for delay and renders judgment in
favor of defendants ARM Ltd. and ARM, Inc. (collectively "ARM") of
non-infringement as to all claims asserted against ARM. Finally,
although it is understood that the defendants have additional non-
infringement arguments, invalidity arguments, equitable arguments,
and other defenses and counterclaims, there is no need to reach these
issues in view of the non-infringement judgment, and all
counterclaims by the defendants with regard to declaratory judgment
of alleged non-infringement, invalidity and/or unenforceability of
the `584 patent are dismissed without prejudice. All parties shall
bear their own attorneys fees and costs.
The clerk of court shall enter partial judgment in accordance.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LTD., ET AL.
Vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:05-CV-494
MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUS. CO.,
LTD., ET AL.
ORDER AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT
On this day came on to be heard Plaintiffs' and Defendants'
Stipulation of Partial Judgment of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent
No. 5,784,584 ("the `584 patent") pursuant to F.R.C.P. 54(b). The
court, after considering the Stipulation, finds that good cause
exists and renders judgment as follows: Pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 54(b), this court finds that there is no just reason
for delay and renders judgment in favor of all defendants of non-
infringement of claim 29 of the `584 patent. In addition, the court
finds that there is no just reason for delay and renders judgment in
favor of defendants ARM Ltd. and ARM, Inc. (collectively "ARM") of
non-infringement as to all claims asserted against ARM. Finally,
although it is understood that the defendants have additional non-
infringement arguments, invalidity arguments, equitable arguments,
and other defenses and counterclaims, there is no need to reach these
issues in view of the non-infringement judgment, and all
counterclaims by the defendants with regard to declaratory judgment
of alleged non-infringement, invalidity and/or unenforceability of
the `584 patent are dismissed without prejudice. All parties shall
bear their own attorneys fees and costs.
The clerk of court shall enter partial judgment in accordance.
------------------------------------...
Hang in there, the fat lady hasn't sung yet. It ain't over till it's over, and it ain't over yet!
AJMO
7 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply