GTL Allegation #1:

The PTAB "completed its review of GTL patent 7,551,732, preserving two

key elements protecting GTL's technology…"

Securus Correction #1:

The PTAB did not confirm the validity of the 2 remaining dependent claims;
to the contrary, the PTAB merely determined – over a year ago – that it
would not review the 2 minor, dependent claims.

GTL Allegation #2:

"We are pleased that the PTAB decision preserves GTL's right to protect key
components of our technology…"

Securus Correction #2:

They can't be that pleased. The PTAB decision invalidated 100% of the 25
claims it reviewed, including all independent claims of GTL's '732 patent. The
2 remaining dependent claims are likely obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. 

GTL Allegation #3:

The "PTAB decision preserves GTL's right to protect key components of our
technology for safely storing inmate recordings ..."

Securus Correction #3:

Securus has examined remaining claims 9 and 10 of the GTL patent and
determined that Securus does not process voice streams to storage devices
in the same way as GTL's patent describes. Therefore, Securus does not use
the purported minor inventions of the remaining 2 dependent claims.

GTL Allegation #4:

"The decision enables GTL to pursue claims now pending in Dallas federal
court that Securus Technologies infringes the '732, and where experts in the
case have estimated Securus could be liable for more than $100 million in
damages for past use."

Securus Correction #4:

First of all, that case is stayed. Second, if and when the Court lifts the stay,
Securus will very likely get the claims thrown out of court for obviousness.
Finally, Securus does not utilize the process described in GTL's patent,
so there can be no infringement. Accordingly, no money will ever be due to GTL
on this patent.

GTL Allegation #5:

"GTL is committed to continuing its investment in innovation, which
is represented by its industry leading patent portfolio."

Securus Correction #5:

By any measure (see below), Securus' patent metrics are superior to GTL's.

Securus

GTL

Advantage

Ratio

Issued Patents

148

48

Securus

3.1X

Pending Patents

89

19¹

Securus

4.5X (Significant Future Advantage)

Issued + Pending Patents

237

67

Securus

3.50X

In-Force Patents

120

48

Securus

2.5X

Patent Infringement

Win-Loss Record

19 – 0

0 – 2

Securus

Infinity

Years Filing Patents

27

16

Securus

69% Longer

License Dollars Collected

$60M

$0

Securus

Infinity

GTL Allegation #6:

"We intend to move quickly to court to demonstrate to a jury how Securus
infringes this patent and is liable for past damages that independent industry
experts have valued at more than $100M."

Securus Correction #6:

There's really no patent left to speak of; just 2 narrow dependent claims
remain – neither of which describe the process utilized by Securus. Clearly,
Securus should be able to prove there's no infringement of the 2 remaining
claims. The case they are referring to is still stayed, so it cannot move
forward until the Court lifts the stay. Moreover, a full patent infringement
case, including appeals, will likely take 2 to 3 years so there is no such thing
as a "fast patent infringement lawsuit."  Securus has been on record for over
a year that GTL requires a full license to Securus' industry leading patent
portfolio, and Securus believes GTL owes it over $115 million. For GTL to
claim that Securus owes GTL more than $100 million for 2 minor claims out
of 27 claims for a single GTL patent would extrapolate to $33 billion, or 300
years of Securus' current EBITDA for their patent portfolio. A relatively
ridiculous number from any point of view, and merely highlights the lack of
credibility of their "expert."