Member Info for JBongo

Interesting read Hellojello. Thanks. It seems a lot more real now I've read that document.

Samsung don't seem to understand the table example very well. The judge says that the table can have other aspects that what is claimed in the patent. Samsung then say "apart from another leg". Seems at odds with what the judge is saying

The notes from the judge make it sound like the issue of validity can still be argued by Samsung as well (although I'm sure they agreed to be bound by the PTAB result). He doesn't mention the PTAB in the jury instructions, so it will be up to our lawyers to put that to bed early on

Way I see it, Samsung are going to be buying me a telly soon! (Possibly a small house if I'm very lucky)

They seem to have upped the stock available on Amazon as well.
Current stock levels are:
28 weight check kits
27 intolerance kits
20 vitamin kits
20 heart health kits

Still no reviews yet

I take it the "MOTIONS IN LIMINE" thing is just what nano have asked for, rather than what the judge has actually ordered?

Good to see them sell some on Amazon at least. Even if it is only ~£250 revenue.

I guess the email will be trying to see you the kits via their website as we will receiece a higher profit margin from these sales - not having to give Amazon a cut. I sort of expected the prices on Amazon to be a higher than on our website to offset this and to encourage people to buy from the website. Maybe at a later date.

Yes, but Samsung are big and clever enough to make it not look like bribery. They might not even have to say anything for thoughts like that to get into juror's heads. The very fact that they're building the factory and ploughing money into the local area might be enough to sway jurors a little.

As I say, only a minor worry of mine.

It's mainly the Jury I worry (only a little) about being influenced by the big new factory creating lots of jobs. Especially if Samsung put out statements to the local press such as "we may not be able to continue with the factory (and subsequent hiring of locals) if we lose this case..."

This is probably the real reason why RG is selling out. Sick of the drama on LSE...

I'm not sure Sammy. I know Samsung paid Nanosys $15m in 2010 to license their IP. It sounds like Nanosys was a failing company back then and Samsung probably got a lifelong license for bailing them out relatively cheaply. Essentially making Nanosys a puppet company.

Samsung probably then realised they could use Nanocos superior mass production methods and say that it was Nanosys' IP.

As far as I can remember, Nanosys' patents were based on the hot injection method, and were therefore unsuitable for mass production on the scale needed for Samsung et al. The molecular seeding method is required for creating large amounts of CFQDs and Nanoco have the Patents for these.

Only 10 of each in stock on amazon.

4 kits available to buy on Amazon from today. Will be interesting to see how quickly the reviews come in. Also interesting that the glucose kit isn't on there for now.

Anyone got a link to the 173? I can't seem to find it (for free at least)

You absolutely sure you're not part of a worldwide conspiracy with the market makers 7shares?? :D

It still needs some good marketing even on amazon. remeber that mylotus was on amazon and still didn't seem to sell many. We'll be going up against 23 and me etc on amazon for DNA testing

Would have been nice to get some solid numbers on the new tests, how many have been sold and the profit from them etc.

Being on Amazon should help. Sounds like boots and lloyds are still undecided on whether to stock them. Hopefully they make their mind up soon and get us on the shelves!

If Samsung started buying on the open market, the price would rocket. They would have to bid for the entire company at once if they wanted to buy us for a half decent price (still multiples of the current mcap)

I keep checking the amazon link for the new tests and they are still showing as unavailable there

Is it not the third party funder who has the sliding scale? I would imagine Mintz as lawyers would have high, but fixed fees. No risk for them then

Agree becontrarian. Settlements (like the recent VW emissions case in the UK) are usually "without liability"