All statements contained in this website, other than those identifying historical facts, constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Safe Harbor provisions as contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements relating to the Company's future expectations, including but not limited to revenues and earnings, technology efficacy, strategies and plans, are subject to safe harbors protection. Actual Company results and performance may be materially different from any future results, performance, strategies, plans, or achievements that may be expressed or implied by any such forward-looking statements. The Company disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements.

© 2018 VOIP-PAL.COM. All Rights Reserved.

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
Voip-Pal.com Reports Decision in the Alice 101 Motion
The Company continues its monetization efforts in the US and Europe 

March 26, 2019 -- Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”, “Company”) (OTCQB: VPLM) Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”, “Company”) (OTCQB: VPLM) announced on March 25, 2019, the Court granted the Defendant’s Alice 101 motion to dismiss in Case Nos. 18-CV-06177-LHK, 18-cv-06217-LHK, C, 18-cv-04523-LHK, 18-cv-06054-LHK. The Company will be filing an appeal and is very confident this decision will be overturned.


Emil Malak, CEO of Voip-Pal, stated, “We are surprised by this decision since the patent was granted based on the decision of the patent examiner and its validity was upheld in an Inter Partes Review by three administrative patent judges. We felt we had submitted a very strong rebuttal to this motion, unfortunately Judge Koh did not find in our favor.  We recognize that our patents are unique and complex. While we respect the judge’s decision we are already at work preparing our appeal and we remain confident our patents will prevail.”
 

“Generally, the process in deciding what is abstract in these rulings is itself abstract. In the past, judges have been split and often contradictory in their rulings on these motions. There are no set guidelines or criteria to make that determination. Alice 101 motions are very subjective in nature. We are determined to vigorously defend our patents."


“In the meantime we are continuing our focus to monetize our patents in Europe where the patent system is much more fair to inventors. The potential users of our technology far outnumber users in the United States. We are determined now more than ever to continue the fight for our intellectual property rights and we are confident we will prevail. Patience is a virtue.”