Wednesday, September 5, 2018

Real Deal Appeal

Link to Appeal on GERS Website
HERE

SkunK

9 comments:

thomas w. atkielski said...

No presiding Judge gives much credence to what an Defendant has to say, especially when the Gers Boys make so many negative claims against the Lower Court Judge(s)? I know how Gers has relevant claims but they and their Attorneys DO NOT know the law as judges do? Then those objections by the Gers Boys seem to suggest anger, (the wording which is so absolute,) which judges right away suspect as being too biased! When they suggest that the Rulings were in "error," or "Wrong," (Not the right word,) then rattle-off a rather long series of mistakes by the L-C Judge(s), the federal Court Judges will undoubtedly find error in one or more Gers contentions, where the other conclusions by Gers will be suspect, and be scrutinized carefully! Too many "Wrongful" contentions against the Defendants by Gers IMO? The reasons for those contentions may have valid reasons, and I hope the Fed's recognize our Companies value in those respects that's for sure, but it seems to me that the Wording could have been better? I just do not see how the L-C Judge could have been so wrong in so many ways? I would rather have seen words like, "We tend to disagree," or "It seems to us that our Facts were not given sufficient attention," or "We don't agree with what the Court ruled in a particular situation," but not wording like "WRONG" or "IN ERROR," which seems so disrespectful and absolute? IMO

Robin said...

Salient points but if one has ever been sued... say, after a car accident? The filing by the offended party reads something like a horror show for the client (unable to move neck, lost income, etc...) It works both ways as the lawyers and judges know just what is what, and the facts then emerge.

Just wait and see, (or look at the past filings by the infringing companies) Heck, you'd think GERS were complete monsters just trolling for a patent suit...

All parties involved in judges/lawyers/law... each push their respective sides using ' language of the land ' to strongly support their cause.

Thinking GERS is in a good position at the moment.

Slashnuts said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Slashnuts said...

The United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, has reversed the judgment of Judge Larry McKinney countless times. The Court of Appeals has found McKinney's rulings to be in direct conflict with Indiana law, he erred by misinterpreting terms, granted summary judgment when there were genuine factual disputes, improperly admitted expert testimony, didn't address issues as required by law and improperly granted summary judgment despite clear conflicting evidence. Basically, everything GERS' attorneys proved he did in our case. Here's just a few examples.

*McKinney Reversed after interpretation of term found to be in direct conflict of Indiana law in Lawler V Bradley

"We agree with Lawler that the district court misinterpreted the “such as” term of
Section 3.1. "The district court’s interpretation of the “such as” clause effectively renders that clause superfluous" "Such an interpretation is in direct conflict with Indiana law."

"Hence the district court’s
decision …. must be reversed"


https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/07-1533/07-1533-2011-03-27.pdf?ts=1411141800

*McKinney erred, was reversed in Weigle v. SPX Corp

"Judge Larry McKinney of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana granted summary judgment in favor of SPX on all claims, but the 7th Circuit reversed in part."

"Tinder wrote that the District Court didn’t address the sufficiency of Weigle and Moore’s evidence on their defective design claim and should not have been disposed of through summary judgment."

https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/32442-indiana-court-decisions-sept-4-17-2013


*McKinney Improperly Admitted Testimony, was reversed in Duke V EPA

"The appeals court also said that U.S. District Judge Larry J. McKinney, who presided over the trial in Indianapolis, improperly admitted expert testimony proffered by the EPA."

https://www.ibj.com/articles/22812-duke-energy-wins-verdict-reversal-in-clean-air-case

*McKinney Reversed due to genuine factual disputes in Centillion V Quest

"We agree with Centillion that there is a genuine factual dispute whether .TXT files meet the limitation at issue."

…"we reverse (McKinney's) grant of summary judgment of noninfringement with respect to eBC and remand for further proceedings."

http://www.cafcblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Centillion-Data-Sys.-LLC-V.-Qwest-Commc’ns.-Int’l-Inc.1.pdf


*McKinney erred, reversed in Stitts V Wilson

"Judge Larry J. McKinney erred, ... For the above-stated reasons, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of Stitts’s petition and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2013/D04-15/C:12-2255:J:Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1118572:S:0

The Southern District of Indiana was designated a "judicial emergency" long before McKinney passed away. There were more than 800 cases per judge at his time of death and 915 cases per judge in the previous 12 months. McKinney's district ranked as the #1 heaviest caseload. #2 in the nation. Judges are people, not superhero's. Naturally, the more a person is overwhelmed, the more likely mistakes are made. I think McKinney was a good man and I'm not sure if his cause of death played a role in this case. However, he clearly made mistakes in our case and clearly has a history of making these same mistakes in other cases.

Good Luck To All!$!$

Anonymous said...

����������

Anonymous said...

In the end, it doesn't matter what we think or believe...

I just hope we see something before the end of the year. I had a good run in the market this year so it would be a good year for some tax loss selling. And Lord knows this has offered be some of that!

Anonymous said...

I seen into the future. $.10 coming.

Anonymous said...

$.10? Wow... Didn't you pat that last month and we have drifted below $.05 now...

Quite honestly I am not sure why I am still here. I guess I believe in the technology but it has not been an easy ride. I pray that the judge sees our POV on the on-sale bar and the mystery behind the dates of the offer letter. We can say and think what we want but anyone that owns this stock would have to admit it all seems a little shady. Cantrell seems like he was running amuck without any understanding of what it meant to offer this for sale. And that is my God given right to my own opinion. And Lord knows I hope I am wrong...

Anonymous said...

I own stock and don't concur. Does that mean I'm not anyone? And what do you think he offered? Was each specific claim of the methods described for sale or was it a test module in general?

 
Free Blog CounterTamron