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.
There is risk associated with legal cases. I have my iwn opinion and I believe that the risk of loss was greater than others more vocal than me still think. For me Nano was always a risky investment, the settlement for me has reduced various aspects of that risk and I regard that as a true inflection point.
"Quite amazing I post and 3 minutes later a response"
I was not responding to you, I was responding to DDubya.
This post is responding to you. Hopefully I have left enough time for this post to be acceptable to you.
Well, have a look at Netlist and Burford for an idea of what happens when you actually win the case. I think TG2D has quoted Netlist in the past as an indication of the great results that can be achieved. So the share price has dropped around 75% since the case was "won", with appeals still going on, no money paid.
Https://caseboard.io/cases/b0ce9223-9fc6-412d-8209-6cf5f39ab01f
Nanogeddon
I may be being a bit thick, but just for clarity, could you explain how the bias in the vote arises. I may be getting confused with the words you are using or I may just be one of those idiots you are referring to.
Tbow112
I do not disagree with that, but there were likely other considerations and one of those would be the contract for supply, as the customer must see that any supplier has financial stability. The settlement provides tnis.
2G2D
I do not believe that Samsung would have won the appeal at PTAB.
I spent a lot of time reading the PTAB court material and came to the conclusion that Samsung were trying to defend the indefensible . They would likely have lost.
I was talking about the actual trial. I think that you should undertake a little research. The jury decide validity of patents, infringement of the patents and willfullness. It is there in the court documents for you to check.