GEVO INVESTOR PRESENTATION FILETYPE PDF

The IEA examines the full spectrum of energy issues including oil, gas and coal supply and demand, renewable energy technologies, electricity markets, energy . Increasing Engagement Between Investors and Companies With Powerful Analytics Tools. We Serve · Team Blog. Upload Presentation; Join Now; Login. ×. File type, PE32 executable for MS Windows (GUI) Intel bit Mono/.Net assembly. md5.

Author: Kajirr Fenrigis
Country: Malaysia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Marketing
Published (Last): 6 January 2008
Pages: 375
PDF File Size: 18.45 Mb
ePub File Size: 2.2 Mb
ISBN: 684-3-99374-481-9
Downloads: 44443
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tuzragore

ECM also includes software tools and services for collaboration, records and email management, and archiving. See KSR, U. Finally, Open Text argues it will lose its first-mover advantage in the emerging off-premises market. Appelt The Appelt article describes the BSCW system, a shared workspace in which members of a group coordinate and organize their work.

Open Text argues that it has lost and will continue to lose market share due to Box’s alleged infringement.

Where, as here, the Court has found that Box has raised a substantial question concerning the validity of the ‘, ‘, ‘, and ‘ patents, the public interest is best served by the denial of a preliminary injunction.

Open Text bears the burden of demonstrating the nexus between the commercial success of Box Edit and the claimed invention.

OPEN TEXT, S.A. v. BOX, I | 36 3d | |

Thereafter, the user must upload the file to the FTP site and can save it with the original name in order to reflect the change to the file in the remote database. Open Text argues monetary damages cannot compensate Open Text for the harm it has suffered and it will continue to suffer because the nature of the document management presentatuon and Open Text’s business model make full lost profits difficult, if not impossible, to capture with a monetary award.

Box provides five versions of its software: M, Docket Item No. The lack of cloud-based revenue contradicts Open Text’s own assertion that it is establishing a “new market” for the off-premises document management market when considerable countervailing evidence in the record indicates Box likely entered the relevant market and was competing for large customers as early as Rather than requiring specific programming for the local application to notify a cache manager that a file has been saved, the advantage of an operating system notification is highlighted as the software being “agnostic as to the file type” such that the jnvestor can “work on the file type with any locally running application that the user wishes to use to modify the particular file.

  GEODINAMICA EXTERNA PDF

In determining whether to grant Open Text’s motion for the preliminary injunction, the Court also considers the balance of the hardships to the parties. Homebanc Corp Home Bancorp Inc. In this mode, the file selected for editing is downloaded from the remote system to the local system so that the user can edit the file on the local system. Teekay Offshore Partners L. User applications selectable by the users Open Text further contends that Appelt does not disclose a plurality of user applications selectable by the users to be included in the collaborative workspace because the BSCW System does not support any type of user applications.

Loss of goodwill, as well as damage to reputation, can support a finding of irreparable harm. Accordingly, when the user selects “Save” from the file menu when “Remote Edit uses ShellExecute” is checked, inveshor same file in the temporary directory is updated. Anticipation requires a single reference to teach each and every element of the claimed invention, either expressly or inherently. Open Text did not report any revenue filetjpe cloud services inand for most ofwhile Box showed its Enterprise sales increased over [redacted] percent from the same year.

Open Text contends this harm cannot be remedied by monetary damages. The instant preliminary injunction motion filed September 13, seeks to enjoin Box from providing its Box Edit feature.

However, the lresentation is not automatically true. Thus, while the Appelt article uses “objects” and the Groupware Patents teach “applications,” both appear to disclose the same features.

Open Text advances three theories to support its assertion that it will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a filettype injunction. Open Text has not provided to the Court, with any level of specificity, what sales have been lost to Box, what Open Text’s market share is in relevant market, or any evidence of actual lost customers going to Box. Loss of First-Mover Advantage Open Text argues that, prsentation a market leader in on-premises enterprise document management systems for the last decade, it has positioned itself to be a first-mover in the emerging off-premises, e.

  DIETRO LA PORTA BASSANI PDF

Further, users are able to select the types of user applications to be included in the workspace. The proposed injunction according to Box would prevent Box from providing a feature of its cloud product to the bulk of its actual and potential customer investlr — any customer with over users. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

OPEN TEXT, S.A. v. BOX, INC.

Having considered the parties’ submissions, argument, and the relevant law, and for the reasons discussed herein, Open Text’s motion to preliminarily enjoin Box is DENIED. This program cannot be run in DOS mode. Box argues that an injunction preventing sales to large customers is an undue hardship because the majority of Box’s revenues are derived from its large customer base. A patent claim is invalid by anticipation if the invention “was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country” before the filing, 35 U.

It is well-established that a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy “not to be routinely granted” and reserved only for those cases where it is clearly warranted.

Box disagrees, arguing that Open Text’s loss of good will argument is convoluted because the irreparable harm alleged “depends upon too many unknown contingencies” and is not caused by the alleged infringement itself, but instead a “hypothetical, mandatory permanent injunction. Open Text’s showing of loss of market share is speculative, whereas an injunction would exclude Box from selling in the market where a majority of its revenue is derived.