Member Info for Intrusivethought

https://news.samsung.com/uk/samsung-electronics-unveils-odyssey-oled-g8-gaming-monitor-at-ifa-2022?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=direct

Well said. Hi five Hawi.

Leading developer and leading producer:

"These Innovate grants highlight Nanoco's position as the leading edge developer of novel nano-materials for electronics applications. The two projects build on Nanoco's existing extensive IP portfolio and the expert know-how of our team. They will help to consolidate our position as the leading producer of nano-materials for use in infra-red sensing applications, whilst also expanding into exciting new areas of opportunity."

Perhaps i'm reading too much into this statement.

use in quantum technology applications.... hmm

http://www.iprdaily.com/article/index/16548.html

Article I had not seen before. A couple of months old. No new information.

here we go...

This again. Try reading.

The general quality of media articles regarding this litigation is so poor and amateurish.

More BS being spouted by PPE on the other side.

https://www.lg.com/hk_en/oled-tvs/2021/eyecomfort-ecofriendly

Related to OLED, however clearly indicates a desire to eliminate the use of not only cadmium but also indium phosphide in their display products.

Other major OEMs will surely seek to attain similar credentials? Bodes well for Nanoco.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/gpu_displays/samsung_showcases_their_odyssey_g8qnb_their_first_qd-oled_gaming_monitor_at_gamescom/1

Samsung's argument will need to be very compelling to achieve that.

Forgive me, but I find it incredible that Nanoco's team would not have examined sufficiency at the very outset.

I agree Amer, a legitimate but desperate attempt to invalidate the patents. It is the idea that it will succeed that i find fanciful, given the extensive tests Nanoco's infringement claim has hitherto been subjected to pre and post commencement of the litigation.

You provide excellent analyses Steak. It is very much appreciated.

Absolutely Hawi.

Cheers BC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJqNM19ueMs

Can someone, if thay can, please verify whether or not sufficiecy could have been raised at the PTAB review?