Company: VPLM
Filing Date: 2025-12-23
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0001493152-25-029094
Chunk: 8

Company: Voip-pal.com Inc
Filing Date: 2025-12-23
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1
Chunk 8
---
 time-to-live or TTL).

6.2
Canadian Patent No. 2,916,217, issued April 16, 2019, also relates to determining a time for permitting a communication session to
be conducted (e.g., a time-to-live or TTL).

6.3.
U.S. Patent No. 11,171,864 relates to similar subject matter. An Issue Notification has been received from the U.S. Patent Office
indicating that U.S. Patent No. 11,171,864 will issue on November 9, 2021.

    7.
    Uninterrupted
    transmission during endpoint changes

    ●
    U.S.
    Patent Nos. 8,675,566; 9,154,417; 10,021,729; European Patent No. 2478678; and Canadian Patent No. 2,812,174 all generally relate
    to, among other things, uninterrupted transmission during endpoint changes (e.g., station handoffs).

    ●
    None
    of these patents are currently asserted in litigation.

7.1
U.S. Patent No. 8,675,566, issued March 18, 2014, generally relates to, among other things, uninterrupted transmission of internet
protocol (IP) transmissions during endpoint changes.

7.2
U.S. Patent No. 9,154,417, issued October 6, 2015, generally relates to, among other things, uninterrupted transmission, where in
response to an IP transmission at a media relay, a session information record is processed in a certain manner.

7.3
U.S. Patent No. 10,021,729, issued July 10, 2018, generally relates to, among other things, facilitating an uninterrupted internet
protocol (IP) communication session, involving internet protocol transmissions between a first entity and a second entity, during endpoint
changes.

7.4
European Patent No. 2,478,678 and Canadian Patent No. 2,812,174 relate to subject matter similar to the aforesaid U.S. patents
(see above descriptions).

NOTE
BENE: While the above generalized descriptions of the Company’s patents have been provided for convenience, they are provided merely
as a rough guide and are not intended to fully characterize the scope of the Company’s legal rights. Reviewers are therefore advised
to conduct their own legal analysis of the Company’s patents and not merely to rely