Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. Watch the video here.
Apparently intel forbid employees from checking available patents on record to allow them to use the wilfull blindness defence if they are ever challenged on it. Cheeky. VLSI didn't provide any evidence to support the claim of pretrial wilfull infringement so the nature of the infringement couldn't be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Hopefully nano's submitted timeline should help us out on that one and get us some decent damages,if we can't secure some of the "unjust profits" calculation method.
It'll be interesting to see the method/s chosen to calculate damages and the outcome of Intel's appeal as well. I'd take $2bn tripled for willful infringement happily.
Given the regularity of the Samsung name appearing before the judge (and the fact that one of his next cases is almost a carbon copy of Nanoco's one) I for one,am more than happy if the judge keeps the Samsung name front and centre in his mind.
I think that Samsung are waiting for the Markman verdict to see how much they are going to need to offer to secure a settlement and if I'm honest I can't see it being much less than any potential court award. If I were nano and it looked like I could get £xbillion I wouldn't really consider an offer from Samsung of much less than that. Samsung could always try and chance their arm to see what their legal bods can pull out of the hat but I don't fancy their chances. Alternatively they could be looking at how much a settlement may likely cost them compared to a buyout bid and waiting to decide from there.
over 16% now
Btb/ddubya,I hadn't considered that viewpoint.It does make sense but I agree with intrusive in that if Samsung had come up with a novel method they would have patented it for use and license sale to benefit themselves.I'm guessing that no patent could be found during the research stages of the case.
If the patents are judged to be valid and Samsung made the items detailed within them without a prior agreement then said patents were infringed. Samsung have made no argument that I can find which states the contrary,and if there was even a sliver of a chance that said argument could be used in court then I think Samsung would have trotted it out by now.
Well maybe not my Easter eggs but definitely a Christmas selection box.
Botbot is spot on. Although when it comes to the actual duration of the hearing itself is usually a day or two at most the actual verdict/judge's opinion can take between a few days to a few weeks to construct (depending on complexity of the case) so realistically we may not hear until late march/early april. On balance I think the earlier the better for our case in that the more obviously correct our position the easier it is to formulate a legal opinion. Also,if it is obvious enough a conclusion to reach in a short time then an injunction against sale will be more likely to be granted all things considered.
In short,the quicker the opinion the larger the trouble Samsung are in.
Ps; the actual trial hearing itself shouldn't be to egregiously long either,Gilstrap typically puts a time limit on the submission of each side and has never given more than 25 hours per side. Given how slowly legal wheels usually turn the hearing could be over in a month and deliberation wont be too long, especially as in jury trials the judge will essentially tell the jury the verdict he expects and if the case is heard without a jury it is all on his personal opinion/interpretation of statute.
When it comes to appeals,the appellant (Samsung hopefully) will have 120 days to file and begin the process. After filing they will get 30 days to submit a brief. Nano will then get 30 days to respond. The appeals process typically takes 6-12 months in total to complete. If Samsung decide to go to the Texas supreme court they get 45 days after the final court of appeal decision to start the process (which can take from months to years). I think it highly unlikely to reach this level as it is usually only reached in cases previously decided on the shallower side of reasonable doubt. If the Markman verdict tips in our favour to even just a reasonable degree this would essentially preclude it from reaching supreme level and dramatically reduce the effectiveness of appeal in damage reduction.
A court case is unlikely to be finished in time for tea and medals by Christmas but it is quite possible I will be eating my Easter eggs while reading the final verdict after appeal.
SimonV,I looked for a fair old while and couldn't find anything. Looks like I'll have to stick with just nano for the moment.
Does anyone know the Solas stock ticker? Asking for a friend.... Especially as Judge Gilstrap is involved in this one as well.
If nanoco can get these concepts to work it will be massive. The ability to improve scanning techniques and imagery is of huge importance and if it can be proven that quantum dots are a viable option in imaging patients with poor renal/hepatic function then this will become a standard imaging technique across the board and will be a medical game changer,the other potential applications are huge. This could be used in everything from stroke medicine to cancer treatment and beyond.If nano can pull an effective biological application out of the hat that has predictable pharmacokinetics someone is getting a Nobel prize.
Agreed ddubya, Samsung sales volume in their TV (and to a good extent sales in their display products overall) look to be very healthy indeed!
https://www.sammobile.com/news/samsung-tv-market-share-hits-all-time-high-q1-2020/amp/
And that article is from the first wave of lockdowns when the countries most affected were in summer and people were able to enjoy the weather. Winter lockdowns must have been even better for display sales what with those covid nights in.
Can you imagine Gilstrap's response to a massive TV being "gifted" to him? It would be like trying to douse a fire using petrol! Depending on the complexity of the case and judgement the judge's findings may take a few weeks to deliver but what's another few weeks after all this time?
Reading through that makes me think it'll be interesting to see how Samsung assist and guide the judge in a credible and convincing manner.
From good old Wikipedia "...a Markman hearing is a pretrial hearing in a U.S. District Court during which a judge examines evidence from all parties on the appropriate meanings of relevant key words used in a patent claim, when patent infringement is alleged by a plaintiff...." Given that Samsung isn't contesting that they have been using cfqd's but rather they are disputing the terms used in the patents the Markman hearing is quite likely to be crucial to the progression of the court case. In my own view I believe that the Markman hearing will basically give us a trial verdict whilst the main purpose of the trial itself will be to decide the degree of damages to be awarded. I think this is the point Samsung have been waiting for. We know they are guilty,they know they are guilty. All that remains is to be told by a judge exactly how guilty they are. Once each party can quantify this they can start to negotiate,after all how can any party negotiate when neither party knows where they really stand in relation to the other? A settlement may come at any point between Markman and the trial date in October. Unless Samsung are guilty enough for a judge to impose an embargo to prevent sales,in which case I think we may be surprised at both the scale and speed of a settlement.
Exciting times.
I would imagine that would have been picked up on during due diligence research or previously mentioned by Samsung in their defence brief.
Granted I don't have an advanced degree in inorganic chemistry,bit from what I can tell it seems that nano have just patented a process which greatly improves the quality of their green,and assumedly blue, dots as well as the stability of their production which should increase yield. I don't remember exactly but which colour dots was it that presented an issue with apple? If it was green/blue this patent could be significant.
They must think they are getting quite the deal in that case as the cryptocurrency is valued at about 275p per unit. I would assume that if that were the case people would be piling in in greater numbers/volume?
Takingmytime,I think Nige_W would echo this sentiment. Enjoy your weekend my man.
TLWilliams, unfortunately I agree with you. Nano's previous performance has been poor especially compared with nanosys. If/when Samsung settle,the next issue I see is whether to hold,partially sell or move on. I understand it is difficult for the company to demonstrate the ability to be a viable long term option given current circumstances and I acknowledge that vindication of current patents will fundamentally change nano prospects over the medium term but the issue I have is can we trust current leadership to protect and grow the business we can expect from our obviously world class talent pool and the patentable research we can expect from them?