New Court Decision April 30, 2024
June 3, 2024
May 2, 2024
VoIP-Pal Receives a Favorable Ruling in the Northern District of Texas
March 18, 2024
VoIP-Pal Announces Three New Special Advisor Appointments
December 4,, 2023
VoIP-Pal Receives Favorable Ruling in Court in the Case Against Locksmith
November 20, 2023
VoIP-Pal Has Successfully Defeated An Ex Parte Reexamination Challenge Against the ’606 Patent
November 1, 2023
VoIP-Pal.com Inc. Receives Two New Patent Grants in India
October 5, 2023
VoIP-Pal Receives Another Favorable IPR Decision from the USPTO
August 1, 2023
VoIP-Pal Receives Favorable IPR Institution Decisions
July 11, 2023
VoIP-Pal Provides an Update on Recent Developments in Its Patent Litigation
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Voip-Pal Discusses its Upcoming Response to the Apple IPR’s
January 09, 2017 -- Voip-Pal.com, Inc. (“Voip-Pal,” the “Company”) (OTCQB:VPLM) is continuing in its preparation of its "Patent Owner's Response", due February 10, 2017, to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) regarding Inter Partes Reviews (“IPRs”), IPR2016-01201 and IPR2016-1198, filed by Apple Inc. ("Apple") against Voip-Pal’s RBR Patents (Patent Nos. 8,542,815 and 9,179,005).
​
Voip-Pal's Patent Owner's Response will be the first time the PTAB will have the opportunity to consider evidence regarding prior art antedating and the reduction to practice of the RBR patents. Voip-Pal will demonstrate through substantial evidence including source code as well as inventor and expert declarations that both of the grounds asserted by Apple in its IPR petitions rely on secondary references that are not prior art to the RBR patents. Given the strength of this "antedating" or "swearing behind" evidence, Voip-Pal fully expects the PTAB to reject all of the grounds asserted by Apple against both of the RBR Patents.
​
Voip-Pal will also be presenting expert evidence, not yet considered by the PTAB, demonstrating that Apple has misunderstood key aspects of the primary reference and thus its IPR arguments also fail on the technical merits.
​
Emil Malak, CEO of Voip-Pal, stated, “We have source code that provides evidence that our inventions were reduced to practice before two of the patents on which the Apple IPR’s rely. While we are confident that our technical arguments alone are sufficient to defeat the Apple IPR’s, we believe that once the Patent Trial and Appeals Board reviews our antedating evidence there will be no need to consider the technical arguments."