UPDATE: Docket filings just updated. Google claims to be readying a motion for Summary Judgement.
Disclosure: Enhydris Private Equity, Inc. is long VRNG.
Disclaimer:
Enhydris Private Equity, Inc. @blogspot is a publication of general circulation
under SEC v. Lowe, and does not act as investment advice in any way, shape or
form. Enhydris does not advocate the purchase or sale of any security or
investment for any specific individual.
Related : Could Vringo be Apple's thermonuclear option against Google ?
ReplyDeletehttp://seekingalpha.com/article/848511-could-vringo-be-apple-s-thermonuclear-option-against-google?source=yahoo
Could Vringo Be Apple's 'Thermonuclear' Option Against Google?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Vringo's (VRNG) turnaround story from ringtone to a probably-acquired short-lived merger company goes full steam ahead because of the Nokia (NOK) relationship, promise of future 3G patent litigation and the need for Apple (AAPL) to acquire stronger patent presence in the 3G and 4G space, due to the Samsung (SSNLF.PK) 4G lawsuit. If Google (GOOG) doesn't acquire Vringo in short order to preclude a trial, I think Apple does, but for a different end game. I think Apple's well-publicized patent meeting discussions with Google were in direct response to Samsung's case and Google's timeline with Vringo's lawsuit. I also think Vringo's purchase of the Nokia patents may have been a chess move envied by Bobby Fischer, who, if what I say plays out, has nothing on Vringo's management.
(To read some of the Vringo v. Google, et al case background of the Vringo case for newcomers, check out James Altucher's comments on Vringo here. Other discussions are here. And even more discussions about the patent war escalation can be found here.)
The question in the current timeline to be pondered is why did Google meet with Apple this past week? With the mysterious patent meeting between Apple and Google, I think Apple put Google on notice this week that it intends to approach Vringo and that if Google doesn't acquire Vringo, along with a "Why can't we all get along" doctrine in place against patent infringement suits between related parties (ie, Samsung), then Apple may go "thermonuclear," as Steve Jobs promised.
With an Apple acquisition of Vringo, Apple would be the claimant and, therefore, beneficiary behind the case against Google's core business model via Vringo. Even if Vringo/Apple doesn't prevail in court or even if the acquisition happens after an initial loss in court, Apple would ultimately be the client and the court room fodder of intellectual property I believe would be available and invaluable to Apple if in all out war against Google.
Remember, Steve Jobs wanted to go thermonuclear on Google since he viewed Android as a product stolen from Apple. Because of this, I found it peculiar that as Apple prevailed against Samsung that Apple and Google would meet this past week in patent discussions. Google and Apple are supposed to be enemies, which is now coming to a head due to their respective futures in the mobile market, but the old saying that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" comes to mind. So if Apple and Google are meeting, who is the common enemy?
While Apple throws out welcomed product designs through a narrow channel, some could argue that its products are lacking in adequate patent support regarding the 3G and 4G space. And while Google may have friends in HTC, LG and Samsung's 3G and 4G patent space, Google, LG, HTC and Samsung may lack in product design originality, evidenced by Samsung's loss to Apple. But, again, who is the common enemy?
The announcement that Samsung is now suing Apple over 4G LTE patent infringement as the impetus for their meeting hit me: neither Apple or Google may not have appropriate patent protection for their most important products. They have common ground, but they also have certain roadblocks ahead where they may need each. In short, they are not controllers of their own destinies since they have the money but may lack the patents and relationships to get them there.
To answer the question, I think the common enemy is the lack of sufficient patent protection. I also think only Apple has this one perfect moment to get what it needs but will offer a truce for a co-existence of Google and Android in the process and let the market decide in the long-run.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/848511-could-vringo-be-apple-s-thermonuclear-option-against-google?source=yahoo
Seeking Alpha
Vringo - The Docket Is Telling Us That Summary Judgment Is Not An Option For Google
ReplyDeleteSeptember 7, 2012
Disclosure: I am long VRNG. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. (More...)
There has been a lot of speculation recently regarding the upcoming Vringo ("VRNG") v. Google ("GOOG") patent trial in the Eastern District of Virginia. Authors I respect such as John Ford and James Altucher have both stated that they believe the case will settle before trial. Other far less reputable authors such as the Modernist have speculated that Google may win on summary judgment before trial.
As I explained in the comment section in my previous article debunking the Modernist What The U.S. Supreme Court Really Says About Vringo, and as requested by one of the comments, let me explain why it is highly unlikely that Google will win on summary judgment having nothing to do with the merits of the case, which I believe Messrs. Ford and Altucher have already covered.
The litigation between Vringo and Google is pending in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The Eastern District of Virginia is known in the legal community as the "rocket docket." Civil litigation pending in this district court proceeds faster than civil litigation in any other district court in the Country. What does this have to do with Google's chances on summary judgment you ask? Everything.
The trial is scheduled to begin on October 16, 2012. Normally a trial start date is not set in stone because many legal issues come up at the last minute and the Court is inclined to grant the parties an extension. The rocket docket is different and the odds of this start date getting moved are fairly low.
As of this writing, it is September 7, 2012. Google has not even submitted its summary judgment motion. After receiving Google's summary judgment motion, pursuant to local rules of the court, Vringo will then have 11 days to respond and Google will have 3 days after that to reply. Even if Google files its summary judgment motion on Monday September 10, 2012, that leaves the Court less than 3 weeks to decide the summary judgment motion prior to the first day of trial.
The Court will simply not have time to write and rule on what will be a complicated and voluminous summary judgment record before the trial is scheduled to start. Either the Court will not rule on the summary judgment motion, or the Court will have to issue a short order basically denying the motion. An order granting summary judgment would take much too long to write as the Court would have to write an opinion it believed could withstand what would be Vringo's inevitable appeal. Courts usually take 3-4 months, sometimes longer to write opinions of this magnitude, but this Court would have to put something together in a matter of weeks, and depending on when Google actual files its summary judgment motion, perhaps only days. Is this possible? Of course, the Judge and his clerks could work around the clock and issue a decision. Is this probable? No.
The February 15, 2012 scheduling order reveals that the Court has already contemplated not deciding the summary judgment motion in advance of trial. The scheduling order states "Disposition of motions for summary judgment is left to the discretion of court, and such motions may or may not be addressed prior to trial." The emphasis is not mine, but that language appears in bold in the Court's scheduling order.
The likelihood of the Court deciding Google's summary judgment motion is therefore slim at best.
It is simply hard to fathom the District Court issuing a summary judgment decision prior to the October 16, trial date. Therefore, Google is left with only 2 options. Go to trial or settle. Summary judgment appears to be off the table.