Judge Orders Patent Troll To Explain Its 'Mr. Sham' To Jury

netbuzz writes "Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has no problem calling Network Protection Sciences (NPS) a patent troll. What he does have a problem with is NPS telling a Texas court that NPS had an 'ongoing business concern' in that state run by a 'director of business development' when all it really had was a rented file-cabinet room and the 'director' was actually the building landlord who merely signed legal papers when NPS told him to do so. Judge Alsup calls the alleged business a 'sham' and the non-employee 'Mr. Sham,' yet he declined to dismiss the patent infringement lawsuit filed by NPS against Fortinet from which this information emerged. Instead, he told NPS, 'this jury is going to hear all of this stuff about the closet. And you're going to have to explain why "Mr. Sham" was signing these documents.'"

Too bad

[Austrian Anarchy]

Too bad there were not any judges like this overseeing the mortgage sham bubble.

/mourn Groklaw

[MrDoh!]

It's cases like this that make me miss Groklaw even more. They'd have someone there in the court to report on all this, and explain the legal shenanigans going on, with links to prior cases of the people involved trying the same thing, and probably how Microsoft is funding them!

Re:Is this Judge Judy?

[Zero__Kelvin]

I'm guessing that the reason you think she understands logic is because you've only heard about her, rather than having actually heard her. She is a straight moron who jumps to conclusions based on zero facts and then uses them to form psuedo-logical conclusions based upon pure rationalizations. I have never seen a more ridiculous person who could best be described as a bad caricature of herself in all my life.

Re:Go Judge

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, at the end of the day, the judge will instruct the jury in the relevant law. He'll let the jury know that these people are trolling asshats, but that what they are doing is legal and that they have to follow the law. They will win something. It won't be huge though because the jury will have been turned against the troll. The troll will then appeal based on, "but the judge tainted the jury". And they will win their appeal. Because at the end of the day, just because they are scum, doesn't mean they are doing anything illegal.

Re:Too bad

[Oligonicella]

Bad example, IMO, I'd rather have the current judge. He's letting them hang themselves. Bean was simply a murderer with a posse. Hanged dozens of completely innocent people.

Re:Wish I could buy that judge a beer

[Anonymous Coward]

William Alsup deserves a medal for finally pushing those trolls a little. Too long have they been getting away with venue shopping and the abusive use of threats to sue. Time to sit back and watch the fireworks...

When this becomes the de facto standard on manhandling shell company tactics like this in a courtroom, complete with prior case law to ensure it, then I'll break out the bubbly.

Until then, don't even consider this to garner the masses attention span for longer than the usual 17 seconds they give it. And we will still watch multi-billionaires get away with financial murder, laughing all the way to the bank with their government subsidized too-big-to-fail bonus checks, not giving two fucks about anyone they leave in their wake.

Re:Mr Sham was signing the documents

[Anonymous Coward]

why in the fuck is this drivel at +3

Re:Wish I could buy that judge a beer

[Darinbob]

However consider if you were on the Jury. Would you want to stick around another week or month to listen to this stuff, without being paid, just so that the judge can teach the guy a lesson?

Re:Go Judge

[saleenS281]

Actually, it isn't. Filing a patent infringement lawsuit on a patent you don't own is very much not legal, which is why they tried so hard to hide that fact. So no, they likely won't get money. And the lawyer representing NPS will be lucky if he isn't disbarred.

And has the IRS got in on the act?

[Bruce66423]

If the landlord was acting as the employee of the company, then the company should be paying social security payments on his earnings, and his rent includes pay as an employee. It's an approach that worked against Al Capone...