Mon, Jul 14, 2014, 1:31 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 7 hrs 59 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Rentrak Corporation Message Board

nubuzzman 27 posts  |  Last Activity: 9 hours ago Member since: Sep 13, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Is it pure co-incidence that QCOM and Rambus announced a licensing agreement the day following MFs petition to invalidate the patents? Now that MF has effectively injected himself into this litigation it should not be difficult to convince the Patent office that he has been working in concert with\and or as an agent for QCOM for sufficient time to have "Blown" the Statute of Limitations. Doubtless that MF has destroyed all written evidence (i.e. e-mails and/or correspondence), given his past history, however, there is sufficient written evidence, via his multitude of written posts on various web-cites,and it is a short step, rather than a quantum leap, to reach the conclusion that MF, like QCOM, had one year to file the IPR. He will deny this relationship, as he has in the past, shred any pertinent written documents as he has in the past, but the Review Board will likely look at the facts and published records, and easily come to the conclusion that he has been, and is, nothing more than an egomaniacal shill for QCOM.

  • Reply to

    Why Dalton Ruling will be REVERSED

    by panalta2000 Jul 11, 2014 11:43 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman 10 hours ago Flag

    The standard is "any evidence at all" and the JMOL is to be denied. This includes contradictory evidence, circumstantial evidence, etc) and Dalton is NOT PERMITTED, under case law to "interpret or weigh the evidence. His lame opinion does just that and there is little doubt if the CCA does their job, follows the law, Dalton should be reversed.

  • nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 30, 2014 3:06 PM Flag

    Every person who sat in the courtroom during the trial "knew" that QCOM stole PRKRs technology. Even the QCOM lawyers, who focused their defense on invalidity. Dalton knew it, particularly when he refused to permit Dr. Fox (QCOMs withdrawn expert) schematics admission into evidence (likely, reversible error). The very reason we have juries is because their collective intelligence is greater than that of any Judge. They, not Judges, determine questions of fact and as you know, infringement is a question of fact. Dalton repeatedly complimented the jury on both their intelligence and their diligence. On May 1st, after arguments, there was little doubt he would enter judgment for PRKR. There are a multitude of scenarios as to why he changed his mind, ignored his oath of office, and ruled as he did. If the U.S.C.A. follows the law, it will not remand and order a new trial. it will reverse Dalton and enter judgment for PRKR. Daltons opinion is as lame as his judgment order. Keep the faith; the system may have bumps, but it works.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    RPX Corp

    by skier22956 Jun 13, 2014 2:25 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 13, 2014 4:47 PM Flag

    I googled RPX and it certainly was an interesting article regarding their extortion. It fits with QCOMs co-conspirators like Jacobs with his Wells Notice, MF with his shredding evidence, the internal e-mails in PRKRs litigation demonstrating how they stole PRKRs technology, the husband of VIA CEO who is presently under investigation by governmental authorities, the authors on SA who obviously work in concert with QCOM and distort the truth, along with their mouth-pieces who spend countless hours posting on message boards to somehow justify QCOMs theft. Justice usually prevails and hopefully they will all get their just due.

  • Reply to

    interest rate

    by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 1:52 PM Flag

    Documents 531 (redacted) and 531-1 are totally irrelevant. Yours lawyers at QCOM filed a stipulation regarding the formula to be used. READ IT. That is the only document that will control the appropriate interest rate. This conversation is OVER.

  • Reply to

    interest rate

    by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 12:16 PM Flag

    You are either a liar or haven't done your homework and math (or perhaps both).

  • Reply to

    interest rate

    by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 11:58 AM Flag

    I shouldn't have to tell a self-professed genius like you to simply google prime interest rates for the years in issue and the google Florida statutory interest rates for the years in issue. Is your brain sleeping again?

  • Reply to

    interest rate

    by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 11:29 AM Flag

    Try the public record for the accurate numbers.

  • Reply to

    interest rate

    by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 11:06 AM Flag

    The SA article skewed the numbers. They were what they were. Do your mathematical homework with the "actual" numbers. Urspond and Capitalist did.

  • nubuzzman by nubuzzman Jun 12, 2014 10:49 AM Flag

    Judge Dalton will follow the AGREED stipulation of the parties in determining same. The rest of the FUD spread by the shorts is just plain BS.

  • Reply to

    Urspond

    by nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:03 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 3, 2014 5:57 AM Flag

    Thank you Urspond......your posts are always on target and I am sure all longs truly appreciate same.

  • Reply to

    Urspond

    by nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:03 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 9:05 PM Flag

    So Statesrip claims to have access to documents that have been redacted. Did he get them from QCOM or their lawyers. What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

  • Reply to

    Urspond

    by nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:03 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 5:43 PM Flag

    -You aren't worthy of a response because you are a LIAR. Docket 531 is an affidavit of Paul Benoit and no where in the document is there any math or any dollars even mentioned.

  • Reply to

    Urspond

    by nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:03 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:06 PM Flag

    I obviously left out a zero...........I meant 110 million. Sorry.

  • nubuzzman by nubuzzman Jun 2, 2014 2:03 PM Flag

    I have been questioned by many of my long friends, and I have more than a few, how we arrive at 11 million. Will you be kind enough to enlighten us and show us the math please. Thank you in advance.

  • nubuzzman by nubuzzman May 23, 2014 11:39 AM Flag

    Don't you get it? The Court order provides that only the parties have privy to the transcript for 7 days. The order was entered on 5/12. On 5/19 when QCOM filed their redaction motion the Seeking Alpha article was published at 4 AM. This was impossible to accomplish without violating the Court order.

  • Reply to

    Transcript of May 1, 2014 Hearing

    by overbrook10 May 23, 2014 7:09 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman May 23, 2014 9:29 AM Flag

    Read the Court order J/O.............The article was published at 4 AM EST and QCOMs motion was filed later that day.

  • Reply to

    Transcript of May 1, 2014 Hearing

    by overbrook10 May 23, 2014 7:09 AM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman May 23, 2014 8:46 AM Flag

    Pure coincidence that the article was published at 4 A.M. on the 19th, and QCOMs motion was filed on 5/19th. Who is the fool? That's a rhetorical question as all well informed know what you really are, a POS.

  • Reply to

    MF and QCOM (Skirting the Law)

    by nubuzzman May 22, 2014 9:54 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman May 23, 2014 8:05 AM Flag

    The article was published on the 19th; coincidently the same day that QCOM filed their motion to redact. Coincidence?

  • Reply to

    MF and QCOM (Skirting the Law)

    by nubuzzman May 22, 2014 9:54 PM
    nubuzzman nubuzzman May 22, 2014 10:03 PM Flag

    Correction; 5/19

RENT
52.78+0.29(+0.55%)Jul 11 3:59 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.