Tech Viking

9

955

Michael Shapiro@mwshapiro·2 Eyl

I did. Judge Albright has at least a bit he has to think through before granting the motion (or granting it in part). Neonode wants him to scrap his claim constructions, so he'll have to analyze if that's proper. Notably, the settlement isn't conditioned on him doing so

Zoran@ZokyPribo

@F_Lindberg @mwshapiro I assume you've seen this?

English

6

0

18

9.1K

Tech Viking@techviking1·3 Eyl

$NEON Judge Alan Albright just signed the Order Vacating his previous Claim Construction and DISMISSING the Neonode v. Samsung case! storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

English

6

67

11K

Tech Viking@techviking1·2 Eyl

@mwshapiro In a previous case Smart Mobile Tech v. Samsung, the same attorney Philip Graves filed almost exactly the same motion (Vacate Claim Construction & Dismissal) on a Friday and judge Albright signed it directly the next day (Monday) without any changes.

English

19

1.2K

Tech Viking@techviking1·2 Eyl

@Deezee1031 @overdrivetbra @unemon1 The company was owned by the founders then and was not for sale. Further, the company was not listed on Nasdaq then and your incorrect market cap figures are nonsensical.

English

0

4

216

unemon@unemon1·1 Eyl

SHORT $NEON ... these ppl are comparing apples to oranges now! little insight for you - Patent scope: NEONODE patent is useful, but not as “mission-critical” to consumer demand as Sonos’s patents. That argues for downward adjustment in royalties per device! THIS CULT ... WOOW

$NEON Sonos was previously awarded damages from Google with a royalty rate of 2.3 USD / unit. The Federal Circuit has now confirmed the patent's validity. Great news for patent owners like Neonode, showing high per unit royalties for a single patent! reuters.com/legal/litigati…

English

4

0

4

6.3K

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

@unemon1 You are again misinformed. None of these patents were ever part of any BK. The patents were owned by Neonode Inc, the not by the previous Swedish subsidiary, at that time.

English

0

13

3.4K

unemon@unemon1·1 Eyl

SHORT $NEON - these big companies like Samsung have a whole department following bankruptcies ... to be able to pick up patents on the cheap! If Neonode patents were really that valuable, whey did Samsung not buy them out of BK? it's funny entertaining with the GENIOUS VIKING!

@unemon1 About Neonode's 879 patent being "mission-critical". This is what Samsungs head of mobile telecom division, Ki-Tai Lee, stated about Neonode's intuitive user interface: "it is the future of mobile phones" and "we need this".

English

6

0

5

9.6K

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

@unemon1 Are you saying that Apple's slide-to-unlock feature/patent and the Neonode 879 patent are not similar? Neonode's patent includes all the functionality of Apple's patent, and adds much more, such as accessing the control panel or answering a phone call with a swipe gesture.

English

0

9

1.4K

unemon@unemon1·1 Eyl

@techviking1 apple and oranges! u know the difference! time of truth will be soon ... and oh boy ... fun it will be!

English

0

397

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

@Deezee1031 I can, and I just did. Is is highly relevant since both cases are for a single patent used in common consumer devices (smartphones/smart speakers) sold in millions of units. I would argue that the 879 patent is much more useful, more used and more valuable than the Google patent.

English

0

3

165

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

$NEON The Google devices were mostly Nest speakers with an ASP of 50-100 usd -> which renders the royalty rate awarded to around 2.3%-4.6% of the unit selling price. If percentages kept the same, devices with an ASP of $400 (Samsung phones) would result in even higher royalties.

$NEON Sonos was previously awarded damages from Google with a royalty rate of 2.3 USD / unit. The Federal Circuit has now confirmed the patent's validity. Great news for patent owners like Neonode, showing high per unit royalties for a single patent! reuters.com/legal/litigati…

English

25

6.4K

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

$NEON If found guilty of willful infringement, Google would have risked up to 3x the 2.30 USD royalty rate -> up to 6.9 USD per unit, for a single patent. The risk of willful infringement found by a jury, could lead to early settlements, such as in the Neonode vs Samsung case.

$NEON Sonos was previously awarded damages from Google with a royalty rate of 2.3 USD / unit. The Federal Circuit has now confirmed the patent's validity. Great news for patent owners like Neonode, showing high per unit royalties for a single patent! reuters.com/legal/litigati…

English

2

40

7.2K

Tech Viking@techviking1·1 Eyl

$NEON Sonos was previously awarded damages from Google with a royalty rate of 2.3 USD / unit. The Federal Circuit has now confirmed the patent's validity. Great news for patent owners like Neonode, showing high per unit royalties for a single patent! reuters.com/legal/litigati…

$NEON $GOOG $SONO Jury awarded Sonos 2.30 Euro from Google for EACH sold device! And this is for just ONE single patent! We can now forget the ideas put forward that a single patent can only generate license fees in the range of ”cents per unit”! theverge.com/2023/5/26/2373…

English

1

42

22.7K

Tech Viking@techviking1·30 Ağu

@unemon1 @Shrimp_a_Whales Again, what we know about that is that a jury in 2014 awarded reasonable royalty of around 2 usd for similar patents. You are also forgetting that Samsung's infringement on Neonodes 879 patent was willful, leading to risk for treble damages up to 3x the royalty rate.

English

Shrimp Among Whales@Shrimp_a_Whales

0

4

291

unemon@unemon1·30 Ağu

@Shrimp_a_Whales did u read the agreement signed in 2005? ... it was a cooperation agreement for only 2 years, renewable on a non exclusive basis! 2 EUR in 2005 was the right price, but as u know tech prices come down fast, same product would have had gone for 20 cents in 2014-20 (claim period)

English

3

0

1

483

unemon@unemon1·30 Ağu

$NEON Samsung on June 30, 2025: ongoing litigations will not have material impact on the co! in the aapl case samsung paid only 600m ... and they did disclose it as potential risk 1b would be material even for Samsung! ... $NEON pipe dream dies here! images.samsung.com/is/content/sam…

@unemon1 Probability weighted FV disclosure?

English

7

0

4

16.8K

Tech Viking@techviking1·30 Ağu

@unemon1 That is not true. Samsung did not say in any of their reports before or after they paid Apple, that the Apple case was "a risk" or risked having any material impact on their financial position.

English

1

13

729

Tech Viking@techviking1·30 Ağu

@unemon1 @Shrimp_a_Whales You are again misinformed about the reasonable royalties. A jury in 2014 awarded Apple (v. Samsung) per-unit damages of $2.75, $2.30, and $1.41 on 3 patents—roughly $3.7, $3.1, and $1.9 in 2025 dollars. Including royalties for Apple's very similar "slide-to-unlock" patent.

English

1

8

302

unemon@unemon1·30 Ağu

@Shrimp_a_Whales Math is math! ... royalty is not more than 30 cents per device! ... the 2 eur number was just a 2 year working cooperation with Samsung! but hey time will tell and it will be very fun!

English

3

0

688

Tech Viking@techviking1·29 Ağu

@mwshapiro @mwshapiro Settlement agreement signed, joint motion to dismiss the case posted in the docket in the Neonode vs Samsung case.

English

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

18

2.6K

Michael Shapiro@mwshapiro·20 Ağu

Aequitas/Neonode Smartphone LLC and Samsung seek another 7-day extension to cross their t's and dot their i's. As the notation in the W.D. Tex. docket puts it the parties have agreed to the form of a settlement agreement but need a week to execute it $NEON

English

8

9

88

13.6K

Tech Viking@techviking1·29 Ağu

ZXX

1

10

848

Tech Viking@techviking1·29 Ağu

$NEON DISMISSAL 🥂

Español

2

43

3.9K

Tech Viking@techviking1·27 Ağu

@Deezee1031 @F_Lindberg This is what a jury awarded per patent per unit, in the Apple vs Samsung case. Further, Apple demanded $40 for 5 patents in the same case, that is average $8 per patent per unit. The suit against Apple is starting again after Samsung, with world wide sales and billions of units.

English

3

0

3

231

Felix Lindberg@F_Lindberg·27 Ağu

$Neon När blir summan offentlig? Inte i domstolsdokument… Neon har löpande fått info om kost enligt avtalet. De borde omgående vid påskrivet och inlämnat avtal få en summa av AQ eller info om summa men de sista advokat räkningarna ska justeras. PM lär komma inom kort!

Svenska

32

11

164

54.8K

Tech Viking@techviking1·27 Ağu

@unemon1 The above numbers are for US sales only. Neonode have asked for sales numbers for Samsung phones sold outside the US in Fact Discovery, potentially going for world wide sales which would be around 3.5 B units increasing the jury awards / settlement numbers quite substantially.

English

1

15

5.9K

Tech Viking@techviking1·27 Ağu

@unemon1 Neonodes '879 patent is further more general than Apple's slide-to-unlock patent. Take $2 per unit, times 700 million Samsung phones 2014-2026. Gets you 1.4 BUSD. Samsung's infringement is further willful, they risk up to 3x in a jury trial --> 4.2 BUSD.

English

0

12

752

unemon@unemon1·27 Ağu

$NEON … pump and dump is based on the 2 euro per device royalty contract signed in 2005! Surprised surprised: it was R&D collab and valid for just 2 years! Current litigation covers 2014 onwards, and price for same technology by 2014 had dropped by 80-90%!

Fabre@fabreres

@unemon1 @AlderLaneEggs @FriendlyBearSA @MilesDyson1960 I agree caution is warranted but $100 mm would be very surprising given the legal costs incurred; you’d think Aequitas would have rolled the dice on a trial instead.

English