(Total Views: 341)
Posted On: 01/05/2018 2:45:00 PM
Post# of 82690
Since I personally feel that the judge changed his wording on the final judgement, my opinion is that could change the stays for the other cases.
This is from the Vasco case. Technically, the SA is not fully resolved, but that case is terminated. And the judgement wording seems different to me, so I just think it is possible that they could now move these forward. Wishful thinking? Speculation? Call it what you want. I doubt they will be able to move them forward, but I am just throwing it out there as a possibility.
Motion to Stay until the subject matter patentability issue raised by the SecureAuth litigation is fully resolved. The parties to file a status update every 120 days, and are to inform the court, within 14 days, of any final resolution and how they intend to proceed thereafter.
This is from the Vasco case. Technically, the SA is not fully resolved, but that case is terminated. And the judgement wording seems different to me, so I just think it is possible that they could now move these forward. Wishful thinking? Speculation? Call it what you want. I doubt they will be able to move them forward, but I am just throwing it out there as a possibility.
Motion to Stay until the subject matter patentability issue raised by the SecureAuth litigation is fully resolved. The parties to file a status update every 120 days, and are to inform the court, within 14 days, of any final resolution and how they intend to proceed thereafter.
(2)
(0)
