RE: RE: RE: RE: Blue55 strategy is everything going forward and it shouldnot be a reactionary decision based on being angry at what happened. They need to review all the testimony and highlight every instance which may have led to the jury decision whether it was the cross examoination of Andrew, the freedom of Simon or the possible incorrect testimony of Dr. B. There were obviously some pivotal moments that led to a negative jury decision on infringement. Given their lack of technical knowlege I can only imagine their heads were swimming with 5 full days of testimony and a firey summation by the lawyers pleading a position.
The patent was on the line for validity and infringement and ruling the patent invalid would have been deadly- that did not happen. This leaves the door open for 01 to review the infringement judgement from a matter of law, and if there was sufficient reason to believe the jury was swayed by a twist of claim construction contrary to the CAFC. The 01 guys and all of us would have a reason to be upset, if in the end, it was once again Judge Hilton that allowed LOGM to pursue this path. It took me a long time to really appreciate the technology and how it works. I reviewed the mountains of testimony in the USPTO re-examine and really did not understand the issue for quite some time. How could the jury have been convinced if indeed they did not fully understand the distributed computing issue and what really comprises software.
Right5 now everyone is ready to fight the battle again- at least emotionally. But there are many many things to consider when calmer heads prevail for B&H and 01 in the days and weeks ahead. They cannot put out a meaningful news release until they have reached a logical consensus. Yes they could pump out a news release saying they disagree with the verdict etc etc. But I for one want to see more. If they are going to appeal I want to know the grounds for appeal and why- what is the specific justification for that action because it will take a long time to get this to the courts and through the process. At the very earliest we are looking at being before the CAFC once again, if that is the route, sometime next February and then await a few more months for a decision. This is a very long haul and this stock needs to be put away for a long time awaiting that outcome.
Then there is Citrix and what to decide to do on that front. Judge Lioi has been slow for her own reasons. She could be waiting for the USPTO to finalize a position. It appears that the appeal there in fron of the PTAB is a few months away given the average timelines for them to hear cases. And regardless of that outcome there remains another appeal process of that decision to the CAFC. I think we all get the picture. Some think she was waiting on the LOGM case and at least out of that came the validity of the patent, but that will still be argued to the PTAB.
So there is not much reason to worry about this. If you still like the story and all the twists and turns in the road lock the stock away and if not, it is really time to move on.
Have a good easter folks and I am holding yet but will retire from this board while the story unfolds.
Have a good easter.