Moore Threads Unveils New GPUs, Fuels Optimism Around China’s AI Chip Ambitions 
Trump Signals Push for Lower Health Insurance Prices as ACA Premium Concerns Grow 
Maersk Vessel Successfully Transits Red Sea After Nearly Two Years Amid Ongoing Security Concerns 
FTC Praises Instacart for Ending AI Pricing Tests After $60M Settlement 
7-Eleven CEO Joe DePinto to Retire After Two Decades at the Helm 
Warner Bros Discovery Weighs Amended Paramount Skydance Bid as Netflix Takeover Battle Intensifies 
John Carreyrou Sues Major AI Firms Over Alleged Copyrighted Book Use in AI Training 
Saks Global Weighs Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Amid Debt Pressures and Luxury Retail Slowdown 
Dina Powell McCormick Resigns From Meta Board After Eight Months, May Take Advisory Role 
Mexico Antitrust Review of Viva Aerobus–Volaris Deal Signals Growth for Airline Sector 
Bridgewater Associates Plans Major Employee Ownership Expansion in Milestone Year 
Elon Musk Wins Reinstatement of Historic Tesla Pay Package After Delaware Supreme Court Ruling 
FDA Fast-Tracks Approval of Altria’s on! PLUS Nicotine Pouches Under New Pilot Program 
JPMorgan’s Top Large-Cap Pharma Stocks to Watch in 2026 
TikTok U.S. Deal Advances as ByteDance Signs Binding Joint Venture Agreement 
Roche CEO Warns US Drug Price Deals Could Raise Costs of New Medicines in Switzerland 
BELLEVUE, Wash., Dec. 06, 2016 -- Voip-Pal.com, Inc. (“VoIP-Pal,” the “Company”) (OTCQB:VPLM) filed yesterday two Requests for Rehearing (“Requests”) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). The Requests ask the PTAB to reconsider its November 21, 2016 Decisions granting institution of 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).
In its Requests, Voip-Pal points out the PTAB’s Decisions clearly overlooked that the challenged claims require a specific ordering of steps, yet the Apple Petitions fail to use a claim construction that accounts for this ordering of steps. The Decisions also overlooked that the Petitioner incorrectly ascribed, without evidence, an alleged deficiency to the primary reference as its key motivation to combine the primary reference with the secondary references. Both of these oversights in the Decisions were clearly set forth in the Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response but were not addressed by the PTAB in its Decision. In view of these oversights, Voip-Pal believes the PTAB should reconsider its decisions and deny Inter Partes Review of the RBR Patents.
Emil Malak, CEO of Voip-Pal said, “While we recognize the Board is often reluctant to reconsider its decisions, in the present case we believe that the Board has genuinely overlooked two “fundamental arguments” out of multiple arguments presented in our Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response."
“We have now clarified these overlooked arguments and we believe the PTAB should vacate their earlier decision to institute."
“We very much appreciate the support of our shareholders.”
The Company’s Request for Rehearing can be viewed at http://www.voip-pal.com/recent-filings.
About Voip-Pal.com Inc.
Voip-Pal.Com, Inc. (“Voip-Pal”) is a publicly traded corporation (OTCQB:VPLM) headquartered in Bellevue, Washington. The Company owns a portfolio of patents relating to Voice-over-Internet Protocol (“VoIP”) technology that it is currently looking to monetize.
Corporate Website: www.voip-pal.com IR inquiries: [email protected] IR Contact: Rich Inza (954) 495-4600
