The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
KEY POINTS
South Korea’s President Yoon Suk-yeol granted a pardon for Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Jay Y. Lee to help overcome a “national economic crisis,” South Korea’s Justice Ministry said on Friday.
The pardon is largely symbolic, with Lee already out on parole after serving 18 months in jail for bribery relating to his time leading the world’s biggest smartphone and memory-chip maker.
Also pardoned by pro-business President Yoon was Lotte Group chairman Shin Dong-bin, who was sentenced to a two-and-a-half-year prison sentence on charges of bribery.
Surprised no one is picking up on the appointment of two big settlement lawyers joining Nanoco team. Suggests the court case may become irrelevant if the matter is settled out of court which people seem to state is the most likely scenario. So news could be out much sooner than mid September, Tick tock
Someone stated on here that he needed funds for another project. Nothing to do with not liking the opportunity here he has other more urgent need for his funds. And of course others have been buying so they like what the see.
Good to see the price holding despite the selling going on at the moment. Also the 3 millions odd sale by Griffiths was absorbed without a problem, looks like that source of shares has dried up which should propel the price when the next bit of good news arrives.
Samsung are bang to rights guilty and cannot squirm out of this one. They relied on the PTAB for some or even most of them being in their favour. Since they lost the lot they haven't a leg to stand on. They will be negotiating an out of court settlement as we speak. This may take months to get sorted. The court case will get reinstated next week for October and the behind the scenes discussions will proceed.
While distracted by this sideshow MEANWHILE THE CLOCK TICKS to our first COMMERCIAL ORDER. TICK TOCK tick tock. very happy days.
To be clear the documents dated 24th June are submissions to the court. The court order is what counts dated 30th June. Which states 14 Days see my previous post. That is supported by the RNS which gives the same timeline.
To be clear the documents dated 24th June are submissions to the court. The court order is what counts dated 30th June. Which states 14 Days see my previous post. That is supported by the RNS which gives the same timeline.
Ref gov.uscourts.txed.195566.121.0.pdf
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that all action in the above-captioned matter is
STAYED until further Order of the Court.
It is further ORDERED that the parties meet and confer and file a Joint Status Report
within fourteen (14) days of the PTAB’s issuance of a final written decision on the last of the
IPRs. Such Joint Status Report shall concisely state the parties’ positions—whether joint or
disputed—on whether the stay should be maintained.
If the Court believes additional briefing would be helpful upon review of the Joint Status Report, the Court will order additional briefing at that time.
Samsung’s previously opposed Motion to Stay (Dkt. No. 86) is DENIED AS MOOT.
So Ordered this
Jun 30, 2021
Jun 30, 2021
ref/https://www.upcounsel.com/willful-infringement
Willful Infringement: What Is It?
Willful infringement is when someone copies a claimed invention and knew the entire time that the invention was patented, thus committing patent infringement. An infringement is considered willful when:
A defendant engaged in acts that infringed the patent or copyright
The defendant knew those acts were in violation of the patent or copyright. They still acted as if they were ignorant of the law or had reckless regard for the patent or copyright holder's rights
Simply put, anyone who copies an invention after it has been patented on purpose has committed a willful infringement. However, the infringement is not considered willful if:
the person has copied the invention without knowing it was patented
the person, in good faith, believes the patent is invalid or no longer applicable
Proving whether the infringement was willful falls to the patent owner. They must come up with supporting evidence for court.
I have to correct the drivel being written see below a nomminee or custodian does NOT NOT NOT report their clients holdings.
Ref https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DTR/5/1.html
Certain voting rights to be disregarded
DTR 5.1.3 R 26/11/2015
RP
Voting rights attaching to the following shares are to be disregarded for the purposes of determining whether a person has a notification obligation in accordance with the thresholds in DTR 5.1.2 R:
(1)
(a) shares acquired; or
(b) shares underlying financial instruments within DTR 5.3.1R(1) to the extent that such financial instruments are acquired;
for the sole purpose of clearing and settlement within a settlement cycle not exceeding the period beginning with the transaction and ending at the close of the third trading day following the day of the execution of the transaction (irrespective of whether the transaction is conducted on-exchange);
(2)
(a) shares held; or
(b) shares underlying financial instruments within DTR 5.3.1R(1) to the extent that such financial instruments are held;
by a custodian (or nominee) in its custodian (or nominee) capacity (whether operating from an establishment in the UK or elsewhere) provided such a person can only exercise the voting rights attached to such shares under instructions given in writing or by electronic means;
10:11:21 29.00 27,000 Sell* 28.80 29.50 7,830 O This is shown as a red sell in this board It was a buy bu me so do not be fooled by the buys and sells shown, the information is regularly wrongly recorded.
Face-authentication security is also improved with higher resolution and more accurate 3D images to protect phone unlocking, mobile payment, and any smart system involving secure transactions and access control
It has the unique ability to operate with a modulation frequency of 200MHz with more than 85% demodulation contrast at 940nm.
Both similar to nano web site Nano heatwave quantom dots facial recognition section. Thank you Feeks
wo 207 tin 78
238 t for me please