VRNG Stock Updates 08/16/2014 18:22:58 $VRNG
"It was not the Review Court Judges duty to dig this up and present it, it was Google's Attorneys!!! Representation is everything in a balanced court! G's attorneys weren't doing their job at the district level or else we wouldn't have gotten this far! "
well if you'll look back I perceived that the judge indicates prejudice. . But that was on his ruling, so,, whatever 'trial' was held and retorts by each party was not shown well enough to say whether he was, or simply cited extensive defense for his decision.. and it's tough to remove the personal risk delusions in which ,if you're bull, you feel everything is wrong or right just to suite your personal goals.
The question is really, whether what he cited,, was convincing enough to warrant a disillusion.
moreover it's going to depend whether their attorneys can put together a package to overrule it.
Personally I got the sense that VRNG's patent would be construed as the tool to teach the rule. And think if that's correct then right's have been abridged, but,, could be of lessor importance. patented is a tricky deal to protect, and like this, tough to assign.
That judge obviously created an extensive defense to support his conclusions.. It's not simply the merits of the case, but, he would also know full and well, it would involve millions of investment bucks, on the stock market too.. a hard responsibility which, although not part of his requirement, meritorious enough to 'try' and get it right.
"moreover it's going to depend whether their attorneys can put together a package to overrule it." 'discovery' of the exact material required to do so would be gold at this juncture. .
Misinformation? Its in the 10Q!
OVERSTATED GOODWILL $65,000,000!
LEGAL FEES $12,955,000!
This decision is way bigger than many people realize. The effects are huge and far reaching. People are getting fired up. Interesting conversation in comments here
http://patentlyo.com/patent/2014/08/judge-rai...lists.html
Company ALSO states CASH BURN is HIGH! Why? Because, all the money the are making from settlements is going towards NEW litigation!
Re-read my post - I said 'lawsuit settlement'. ; )
LOL that's not going to happen on Monday or even next week, plain & simple; this will drop at least 10 cents lower.-- "If people realize the huge discount VRNG is now trading at, we might be at $1.50 on Monday."
Financials reported on their latest 10q filing shows $0 for ACCOUNTS REC. And they have never shown any Revenue from Google. What are you talking about?
Something tells me this ain't over just yet. Obviously the judges didn't see it the way the jury did or HJJ. There is a lot they must have either ignored or missed. I'm not in the legal field, but this east Texas boy's common sense knows that somehow justice will prevail. It doesn't seem right that the thieves win in the end.
The Appeals Court may have opened a Pandora's Box!
Quite right..they should release the source code! They should open all their patents to others just like Tesla opened their patent portfolio!
Someone on ST recently posted that if the patents are no good, what's to stop VRNG from publishing the source code on the web? GOOG seemed still very interested in keeping it secret during the trial.
NET LOSS $21+ Million!
Per their last annual report, ALL cash is from lawsuit settlement! Page 31 of the last annual 10q states that the loss of the search patent lawsuit with Google could have an adverse affect on ANY future litigation. Specifically, they state, "If this were to occur, it will have a material adverse affect on the viability of our company and our operations."
We don't have to PROVE anything. The company OUTRIGHT admits this will CRIPPLE the company. Lawsuits are their ONLY form of revenue!
Does en banc require a precedential case? If not IMO there's some hope for VRNG but if precedential is the standard for en banc, is this one precedential?
IMO it's clearly wrong but that may not be enough to get en banc
Daniel Ravicher tweeted the following:
"$VRNG decision from Court of Appeals overturning jury is shocker, and Chen rightly dissents. An en banc petition surely will be forthcoming."
I think a massive round of forced dumping by institutions take this to the .40 range then lets see.
As A.R. is overstated in the Earnings report, current valuation is set TOO HIGH! Thus, the share price is OVERvalued. The TRUE support line is .025-.55. That is where this is headed. No RALLY will occur before then. IMO
"It was not the Review Court Judges duty to dig this up and present it, it was Google's Attorneys!!! Representation is everything in a balanced court! G's attorneys weren't doing their job at the district level or else we wouldn't have gotten this far! "
well if you'll look back I perceived that the judge indicates prejudice. . But that was on his ruling, so,, whatever 'trial' was held and retorts by each party was not shown well enough to say whether he was, or simply cited extensive defense for his decision.. and it's tough to remove the personal risk delusions in which ,if you're bull, you feel everything is wrong or right just to suite your personal goals.
The question is really, whether what he cited,, was convincing enough to warrant a disillusion.
moreover it's going to depend whether their attorneys can put together a package to overrule it.
Personally I got the sense that VRNG's patent would be construed as the tool to teach the rule. And think if that's correct then right's have been abridged, but,, could be of lessor importance. patented is a tricky deal to protect, and like this, tough to assign.
That judge obviously created an extensive defense to support his conclusions.. It's not simply the merits of the case, but, he would also know full and well, it would involve millions of investment bucks, on the stock market too.. a hard responsibility which, although not part of his requirement, meritorious enough to 'try' and get it right.
"moreover it's going to depend whether their attorneys can put together a package to overrule it." 'discovery' of the exact material required to do so would be gold at this juncture. .
Misinformation? Its in the 10Q!
OVERSTATED GOODWILL $65,000,000!
LEGAL FEES $12,955,000!
This decision is way bigger than many people realize. The effects are huge and far reaching. People are getting fired up. Interesting conversation in comments here
http://patentlyo.com/patent/2014/08/judge-rai...lists.html
Company ALSO states CASH BURN is HIGH! Why? Because, all the money the are making from settlements is going towards NEW litigation!
Re-read my post - I said 'lawsuit settlement'. ; )
LOL that's not going to happen on Monday or even next week, plain & simple; this will drop at least 10 cents lower.-- "If people realize the huge discount VRNG is now trading at, we might be at $1.50 on Monday."
Financials reported on their latest 10q filing shows $0 for ACCOUNTS REC. And they have never shown any Revenue from Google. What are you talking about?
Something tells me this ain't over just yet. Obviously the judges didn't see it the way the jury did or HJJ. There is a lot they must have either ignored or missed. I'm not in the legal field, but this east Texas boy's common sense knows that somehow justice will prevail. It doesn't seem right that the thieves win in the end.
The Appeals Court may have opened a Pandora's Box!
Quite right..they should release the source code! They should open all their patents to others just like Tesla opened their patent portfolio!
Someone on ST recently posted that if the patents are no good, what's to stop VRNG from publishing the source code on the web? GOOG seemed still very interested in keeping it secret during the trial.
NET LOSS $21+ Million!
Per their last annual report, ALL cash is from lawsuit settlement! Page 31 of the last annual 10q states that the loss of the search patent lawsuit with Google could have an adverse affect on ANY future litigation. Specifically, they state, "If this were to occur, it will have a material adverse affect on the viability of our company and our operations."
We don't have to PROVE anything. The company OUTRIGHT admits this will CRIPPLE the company. Lawsuits are their ONLY form of revenue!
Does en banc require a precedential case? If not IMO there's some hope for VRNG but if precedential is the standard for en banc, is this one precedential?
IMO it's clearly wrong but that may not be enough to get en banc
Daniel Ravicher tweeted the following:
"$VRNG decision from Court of Appeals overturning jury is shocker, and Chen rightly dissents. An en banc petition surely will be forthcoming."
I think a massive round of forced dumping by institutions take this to the .40 range then lets see.
As A.R. is overstated in the Earnings report, current valuation is set TOO HIGH! Thus, the share price is OVERvalued. The TRUE support line is .025-.55. That is where this is headed. No RALLY will occur before then. IMO
