Member Info for Intrusivethought

I am sure that such arguments as sufficiency have been made in other cases, and failed.

Fanciful. Almost ridiculously so.

Not relevant Gonebroke.

Love the timing of the German litigation..... during Gamescomm:

https://www.displaydaily.com/article/press-releases/press-release-samsung-display-setting-a-new-standard-of-excellence-for-gaming-with-its-oled-and-qd-oled-displays-at-gamescom-2022

https://www.sammobile.com/news/samsung-major-increase-qd-oled-production-this-year/

https://www.printedelectronicsnow.com/contents/view_online-exclusives/2022-08-24/nanosys-is-making-progress-on-inkjet-printing-qd-displays/

Agree BC. Tenuous argument. S are grasping at straws with that one.

Could sufficiency reasonably have been raised at the PTAB? If so, then it is a nonstarter.

Can the PTAB cover sufficiency if raised?

Motions accepted or declined?

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/NANO/litigation-update-liby5ftji0smug5.html

Go to trial. Let the court set the reasonable royalty.

If they are, well then...... the sheer quantity of image sensors that Sony produces and sells per annum!

Very true. Also, speculation, but I can't help think that our Asian chemical partner is somehow connected to Sony.

https://www.eetimes.eu/how-smartphones-will-disrupt-the-swir-imaging-industry/

Well remembered Nig.

More BS. Close it now.

No need for apologies. It's all good.

Please listen to me people. The extent of my knowledge knows no bounds.

I am the Messiah...... and a very naughty boy.

Yes I think you're right. I remember reading a legal summary re EU patent law along those lines.

OBJECTION! BS!