(Total Views: 324)
Posted On: 12/02/2017 1:00:56 PM
Post# of 82676
I know a lot of us are investigating and speculating while trying to achieve some clarity.
Is it possible that
MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DKT.87 ) The Motion is GRANTED with prejudice. Because it has been determined that the Asserted Patents are invalid,
is referring to section 1 or an amended item from the following Z jumpshare?
https://jumpshare.com/v/1tyhRJKxEPIkeTkxMdrV
It looks like SecureAuth tried to use some patents to justify their arguments. Could it be those patents that are invalid?
Thanks
Is it possible that
MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DKT.87 ) The Motion is GRANTED with prejudice. Because it has been determined that the Asserted Patents are invalid,
is referring to section 1 or an amended item from the following Z jumpshare?
https://jumpshare.com/v/1tyhRJKxEPIkeTkxMdrV
It looks like SecureAuth tried to use some patents to justify their arguments. Could it be those patents that are invalid?
Thanks
(1)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
