We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Tried to do it on my phone unsucceasfully. It was a pie chart. All I can find now is an appendix of the methodology
I have found this useful article (focussing on institution rates) which confirms :
"Patent Institution Rates
Institution is a critical threshold for inventors. Once instituted, a patent is stripped of the presumption of validity and the procedures heavily favor invalidation. Previous reports have shown that the PTAB invalidates 84% of patents (in part or whole) that reach a final decision. This analysis covers 5,983 patents for which the PTAB has issued an Institution Decision."
https://usinventor.org/ptab-statistics/
I am out today but will try to retrieve what I was looking at previoualy. Same source I think but was the % for all claims surviving excluding partial success. I might have misinterpreted it too but will check.
"Anyone can check the PTAB stats on this too. Patentees have a 13% success rate. It was only 6% for 2021."
@Feeks - can you please point me in the direction of the data for this? From what I can see the success rate is far higher, although appreciate I could be misinterpreting it.
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab/statistics/aia-trial-statistics-archive#:~:text=FY21%20End%20of%20Year%20Outcome%20Roundup%C2%A0
Good post steak and ale @ 12:19.
Anyone can check the PTAB stats on this too.
Patentees have a 13% success rate. It was only 6% for 2021. Nanoco got through that stage wholly intact so they are in a small minority of claimants going into trial. The articles I posted recently comment on how 'Big Tech' relies heavily on PTAB invalidity challenges to knock inventors down.
Whatever happens with the important MMC argument, Samsung to be arguing at PTAB in support of having used an emulsion in its process - Dubrow - as it said the epoxy was not completely evaporated. There would be no issue about this at all if it was not using an emulsion
Troublesome, this is exactly what I said regarding why I think LOAM sold some (crystallise profits for quarterly reports). It’ll be ironic in that a lot of institutionally owned stocks, usually very stable, may suffer badly over the coming months.
Very little of this has to do with nano’s own personal journey, with a couple of major inflection points round the corner. In that sense it’s not a bad defensive play as the litigation aspect is ‘market proof’. US equities, which were in the main overvalued, is a different story and could suffer badly.
:D
They keep falling down flights of stairs.
None of them have a leg to stand on.
Fund managers are suffering massive outflows of cash as people pul money out of the market :
https://www.standard.co.uk/business/city-jobs-banking-rishi-tax-numis-b1009322.html
Don't really know when to expect a turnaround with no real long or even short term strategy in place !
has another one gone? are Samsung killing off their lawyers to delay things! : )
I don't see any justification for delays- he died last November, so Samsung have had months to find a replacement.
Under suspicious circumstances ?
reading that the Samsung lawyer has died, which means delays?
I may be wrong, but i suspect it's RG, and he's probably selling out his remaining 3.79% position in the company.
He's been reducing since February. Has to be a fairly major holder to move the needle this much.
The reason this is tanking is Michael Edelman. I blame him for all the world's problems.
Having topped up 2 days ago at 35.4p it's galling to see today's drop. Have topped up again another 3000 shares and am now in this for much more than any other share I own.
The story hasn't changed and we all know the risk vs reward here. Much as I would like to invest more, I can't risk any more as I have been 'averaging up' not down in NANO.
Good luck all holders on this generally great board.
And Good Luck !!
May it be with you forever.
Unless of course something since the decision to pursue infringement has changed to make the case for infringement weaker in the eyes of the senior executives. Which is why I come back to the point I raised last week - the only thing that can have changed for me is if a definition of an MCC they were relying on could potentially be redefined - hence weakening potential infringement case. I still see that filing for redefinition of the MCC as pivotal. But personally still feel it is unlikely to be changed due to the earlier ruling to respect Markman.
The current share price makes no sense to me. How many times have we heard that on boards? But seriously, I saw some real risk in approaching the PTAB for a verdict on validity of the patents- patent courts and their decisions are notoriously difficult to fathom sometimes. Regardless of what the actual truth of the matter is, they make subjective decisions so I was wary of the risks.
Conversely, having worked in the tech sector for my whole life I know for a fact that the decision to pursue infringement through the courts is one that is not made lightly- you have to be absolutely sure your Ip has been infringed before embarking on the very costly journey.
What’s more, when going through third party funders you can’t just rely on judgement, opinion, bravado, arrogance or ignorance (all great board directors traits) when making that decision- you have to sell the conviction through evidential based argument to convince someone why they should spend millions on taking your case to court.
Against that backdrop how can there be no premium on share value before and after the decision that the patents are valid and all that is left is the infringement case??
How much of a premium comes down to the damages calculation which I’m not going to get into, but as it stands this price must be seen as bargain compared to previous valuations, regardless of who is selling right now.
I’ll continue to add until more news is available.
It might be worth remembering that sometimes not getting what you want can be a wonderful stroke of luck.
Or just all in the mind.
Zzzzz.........
Added some more at 32.9. That’s probably me done now til we hear something concrete on the litigation or commercialisation front. Current price is basically 0 premium paid for the PTAB vs the high pre PTAB. What a funny thing sentiment is!
Will still probably close 34/35p
@Skeletor: No idea. My only educated guess is that it is a combination of one investor still offloading for whatever reason and maybe buyers reluctant to buy in a weakening overall market.
I hold strongly here as the settlement or court decision is totally uncorrelated to the market.
This has held up okay on other ftse down days and now seems disproportionately down. Have I missed a negative court delay or something?