The Pandora Markman was a very nice "win" for Augme with the important claims adopting Augme's proposed definitions. The one that went Pandora's way, I don't feel materially affects anything with the patent claims.
What does Augme get out of the Markman from a business / litigation standpoint?
1. Likely additional leverage with any negotiations that are happening behind the scenes.
2. AUGT will be able to prove infringement in a much easier and clear way to a jury.
3. Impacts other defendants being sued with this patent.
4. Impacts future licensees or defendants that might have exposure to this patent.
All in all an excellent result for the Augme/GP team.
I caution readers / investors that the time to see material results is typically very long and the events play out way longer than anyone ever expects. The fact that it took close to 9 months for the Markman to be finalized is stunning. Litigation is a lengthy process filled with uncertainties. PA found out the hard way.
flyers, great post, thanks for your thoughts on the Pandora Markman ruling. Do you think that this will influence Judge McMahon's ruling on the definition of the term "associated with" in the AOL case?
Jason, I was typing this while Flyers was replying to your post also. Ironically I typed exactly the same words as Flyers in describing McMahon. How she reacts might depend upon what time of the month it is, or how she becomes aware of the Stark ruling. Does she discover it on her own, or does she react negatively to someone bringing it to her attention, as though they are trying to "influence" her? I would hate to be an attorney trying a case before her, because she is unpredictable. I just hope she becomes aware of the ruling, and hopefully she will see it as "cover" for her to interpret "associated with" in the same way.
I would think so but she is a wild card and crazy. Predicting anything that she might do is impossible. I am cautiously optimistic that she will see the light. Time will tell. Hopefully it doesn't take too much time though.