NEWS & ANNOUNCEMENTS
Axcess Appeals Baker & Botts ruling
Learn more: Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment
Update on Baker Botts Litigation
On Thursday, May 15th, the jury found the law firm Baker Botts negligent for $40.53 million in Axcess' malpractice suit against them for representing Savi Technologies and Axcess in patent prosecution work at the same time. However, the Court had previously issued Directed Verdicts based on a Dallas Appeals Court case where the claims of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty were combined into the negligence claim where the limitation on the time for filing suit is 2 years. The jury found the harm should have ended in 2007, one year too early for the statute to enable Axcess to recover damages.
New mailing address for Axcess International Inc.
Axcess International Inc.
On October 25th, Axcess submitted a Notice of Appeal to the USPTO regarding the "953" patent currently in the re-exam process. The Notice is the next step following the USPTO's response to Axcess' Final Office Action response, and continues the process of challenging the rejection of claims of the 953 patent.
Update - SEC Administrative Proceeding
The SEC's Order toward Axcess International is available via this link:
On September 16th, the SEC issued an Order instituting an Administrative Proceeding and provided a Notice of Hearing regarding tardy SEC filings from the fourth quarter 2010. The Company notified the SEC last September it was beginning the audit catch-up work. Substantial progress has been made for the period 4Q' 2010 - 2012 but the work has not been completed due to a funding shortfall. The Company has until September 26th to respond. The SEC has issued a suspension in trading through September 25th. Copies of the SEC documents are available via these links:
The USPTO has reiterated it's denial of the claims in the re-exam of the "953" patent which is the subject of the infringement suit against Savi Technologies. The next action is for the Company to file an appeal in the matter by September 26th.
On August 26th, Axcess responded to the USPTO's recent office action regarding the `953 patent which is the subject in the Savi litigation. Axcess expects feedback from the USPTO within 30 days.
The USPTO has issued a final office action in the re-examination of Axcess patent 6,294,953. The examiner rejected the arguments submitted by Axcess on May 20, 2013 in response to the office action of March 18th. Axcess has until August 26, 2013 to respond.
July 24, 2013. In the case, Axcess International, Inc. v. Baker Botts, LLP, Cause No. CC-13-01301E, in the County Court at Law Number 5, Dallas County, Texas, Axcess has received a special number one setting court date of April 21, 2014. The number one setting increases the certainty the trial will occur on that date versus the lower priority position on the December 2, 2013 docket.
Axcess International Inc. Unaudited 2012 Financials
Learn more: Axcess Inc. Unaudited 2012 Financials
On June 5, 2013, in Axcess International v Savi Technologies, Judge Ed Kinkeade ordered a STAY the case pending the next outcome of the USPTO office action filed by Savi in September 2012 asserting patent invalidity for the central patent in the case. It is anticipated the third Office Action from the USPTO will be in August.
The Court has assigned Judge Ed Kinkeade as the new Judge in the Axcess v Savi case. In Axcess v Baker Botts, the court date was announced for December 2nd.
UNAUDITED INCOME STATEMENTS AND BALANCE SHEETS FY/CY 2010 and 2011
April 26, 2013 - As of this date, Axcess International Inc. (AXSI) is performing an audit of periods 4Q2010 through 4Q2012. The intent and requirement of the audit is to work toward becoming current on SEC filings for that period. Learn more: Axcess Inc. Unaudited Income Statement
Court Provides Axcess Guidance on Damages Claims
On Friday January 25th, Judge Royal Ferguson entered an Order requesting Axcess' damages claims be written in light of certain Court precedents related to damage awards. You can see the Order by clicking the following link: 272 Order Re Hakala
Senior Judge Royal Furgeson ordered the delay in the trials of Axcess' two legal actions
On Tuesday, January 8th Senior Judge Royal Furgeson of the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas ordered the delay in the trials of Axcess' two legal actions, Axcess vs Savi Technologies, Case No.3:10-cv-1033-F and Axcess vs Baker Botts LLP, Case No. 3:10-cv-1383-F. The orders can be reviewed by clicking the following links:
Axcess International filed an 8k with the SEC
Last Friday, October 12th Axcess International (OTC:AXSI) filed an 8k with the SEC regarding the appointment of new auditors and additional information that may be of interest to you. Investor Call Playback Available. The Axcess Investor Conference call from October 16, 2012 can be listened to via the following playback number: 605-562-3099, code 646559
Axcess Inc is moving offices!
Axcess International Inc. is moving offices. As of May 1, 2012, our new address will be 4950 Keller Springs, Suite 130, Addison, TX 75001. Our phones will be down during the move but will be back on line Thursday May 5th. During this time if you have questions about our product, need support or any other questions, please address them to support.
On April 19, 2012, the Markman ruling was issued
On April 19, 2012, the Markman ruling was issued in case no. 3:10-cv-01033-F, Axcess International, Inc. vs. Savi Technology, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. Axcess is suing Savi for patent infringement related to its RFID technology. To download the ruling, you may click on the link below. According to Wikipedia, a 'Markman hearing is a pretrial hearing in a U.S. District Court during which a judge examines evidence from all parties on the appropriate meanings of relevant key words used in a patent claim, when patent infringement is alleged. Holding a Markman hearing in patent infringement cases has been common practice since the case of Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.. The U.S. Supreme Court found that the language of a patent is a matter of law for a judge to decide, not a matter of fact for a jury to decide. Markman hearings are important, since the court determines patent infringement cases by the interpretation of claims'. In the Order, there were nine disputed claims and nine agreed to claims.
Axcess Certified Partner Training