2 Comments
User's avatar
Steff's avatar

What is your opinion regarding their chances of actually succeeding with this trial/settlement? Pros and cons for NEON?

Expand full comment
Shrimp Among Whales's avatar

I think vis-a-vis Samsung the odds are quite good, particularly due to the signed license agreement. Reckon Samsung's already offered lowball settlement figure(s) (ie legal costs + some compensation), so key question is how AQ weighs a certain, lower payoff vs. taking a calculated bet on trial (which is risky and time consuming incl. appeal)? My guess, caveat I'm neither a lawyer nor US patent expert, is they'll settle between close of Expert Discovery (e/o/Jul) and Jury Trial (Oct.)

Remember, it's AQ (not NEON) running and funding the lawsuits, and given AQ's a relatively small and private firm, you'd think they'd want to get their money back++ w/ Samsung, and then leave upside to pursue a trial vs. Apple (who typically never settles) and potentially Google.

An alternative to a Samsung settlement would be to monetize (sell) part of their claim to a third party pre- trial, like eg Burford Capital did w/ in the Petersen-YPF case

https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/content/6df17bd7-44a3-5b9f-bc45-a7d84f9fd4f7

Thus, I believe their chances are good, particularly vs. Samsung, but it's 'Complicated'

Expand full comment