Required/suggested reading-BigPapaBear's post!
Thx for sharing!
Posted On: 02/05/2019 11:46:00 AM
Posted By: Big Papa Bear
Re: 4sleddogs #48319
SA will be put in a position to settle immediately if the appeal is ruled in favor of SFOR. If gets remanded back to California and I assume a new Judge and he or she is going to go against a federal appeal? Not likely but it is California. That being said SA is on the HOOK for Treble damages if they pursue it. SA council has a duty on how bad this could be. Settle now or pay huge latter. I expect it's already in negotiations. As I said before the arguments and oral hearing were a formality. The arguments are mute in my opinion. The laws are specific and it should have never made it to the appellate division. The appellate division has a duty to rule based on current law, precedence and past supreme court rulings on Alice and PTAB rulings and in my humble opinion it falls into scope of "For SFOR" No if and or Buts! Though not an attorney this argument offered up by SA council is illogical. They take a practical communication theory of checks and balances and try to say it is the same as our patents when in reality we have Programs and logins that are computer generated that goes far past human error. It's the human error that is out of this equation and its as simple as that. So we can place the same theory on a car. It's no different than a horse and buggy. It is transportation! It's not unique to a horse and Buggy! Stupid comparison but this no better than what SA's council's argument is.
Thx for sharing!
Posted On: 02/05/2019 11:46:00 AM
Posted By: Big Papa Bear
Re: 4sleddogs #48319
SA will be put in a position to settle immediately if the appeal is ruled in favor of SFOR. If gets remanded back to California and I assume a new Judge and he or she is going to go against a federal appeal? Not likely but it is California. That being said SA is on the HOOK for Treble damages if they pursue it. SA council has a duty on how bad this could be. Settle now or pay huge latter. I expect it's already in negotiations. As I said before the arguments and oral hearing were a formality. The arguments are mute in my opinion. The laws are specific and it should have never made it to the appellate division. The appellate division has a duty to rule based on current law, precedence and past supreme court rulings on Alice and PTAB rulings and in my humble opinion it falls into scope of "For SFOR" No if and or Buts! Though not an attorney this argument offered up by SA council is illogical. They take a practical communication theory of checks and balances and try to say it is the same as our patents when in reality we have Programs and logins that are computer generated that goes far past human error. It's the human error that is out of this equation and its as simple as that. So we can place the same theory on a car. It's no different than a horse and buggy. It is transportation! It's not unique to a horse and Buggy! Stupid comparison but this no better than what SA's council's argument is.
2
Zerify Inc (ZRFY) Stock Research Links
SFOR STRONG!!! GO SFOR!!!
