Max Sound Corporation Moving to Appeal in Its Action Against the Internet Giant Google

SANTA MONICA, CA--(Marketwired - February 18, 2016) - Max Sound Corporation  (OTCQB: MAXD) provides a brief litigation update to its Shareholders on the Northern District Court's latest decision.

On February 16, 2016, The Northern District Court re-affirmed its previous decision in the matter of Max Sound Corp v Google et al., when it denied a motion by MAXD to reconsider that decision. This decision came as no surprise to MAXD, as MAXD's motion was merely a formality to pass through on the roadmap to its next step of filing an appeal. MAXD's strategy was originally discussed in the company press release dated November 25, 2015 in which MAXD's U.S. Counsel Eric Buether of Buether, Joe & Carpenter stated, "We are disappointed with the court's order. We strongly believe that the order is wrong under the facts and law. We intend to appeal the court's decision and are confident that it will be reversed by the court of appeals."

The Court's decision actually will benefit MAXD in its appeal of the previous decision because it contains language confirming that the Court applied the incorrect standard when it granted Google's motion to dismiss. In particular, the Court's order states that "the court explained [in its order granting the motion to dismiss] that Max Sound could not be considered the 'virtual assignee' of the '339 patent because it failed to produce a written instrument showing it obtained rights, directly or otherwise, from Vedanti Systems Limited." However, as we have previously discussed, Max Sound did not contend it had "virtual assignee" standing. It contended it had "exclusive licensee" standing which does not require proof of "a written instrument showing it obtained rights, directly or otherwise, from Vedanti Systems Limited." In addition, The Court also wrongly stated that Max Sound could not cure the alleged problem of not naming VSL as a party after the lawsuit was commenced. Max Sound's motion for leave to amend to add VSL as a party was predicated entirely on the Court's language in footnote 2 of the dismissal order that, assuming VSL had the rights to the '339 Patent as asserted by Max Sound, dismissal was still appropriate because Max Sound did not name VSL as a party. This alleged defect in Max Sound's pleading is considered a defect of prudential standing and not constitutional standing. Defects in prudential standing, such as failing to name the patentee as a party, can be cured after the commencement of a lawsuit. Max Sound's motion cites the case law supporting this well-established principle.

John Blaisure, MAXD CEO says of the decision, "The Court's denial of MAXD's motion was no surprise to us, and was simply a formality which paves the way for the next steps in our battle against Google. Large lawsuits of this nature often take time, and we are confident that justice will prevail to the benefit of MAXD and all stakeholders on our side."

A previous published press release side note to this decision, is the Superior Court's Order to Show Cause (OSC) action against VSL, which is scheduled for March 24, 2016. These contempt proceedings could open the door for MAXD to move much faster in re-establishing its case against Google in Northern District, without the need for the appeal mentioned above, which is imminent at this time.

Legal advisors of MAXD in the United States: Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., and Buether Joe & Carpenter, LLC

About Max Sound Corporation: As creators of acclaimed MAX-D HD Audio, Max Sound can provide a better solution for Audio, Video and Data transmissions. Max Sound Corporation is the company that brings forth technologies for the betterment of our world, including VSL's Optimized Data Transmission Technology. Max Sound®, MAXD® and MAX-D Audio Perfected® are registered trademarks. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. To learn more about the MAX-D Technology, please visit

SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995: Statements in this press release which are not purely historical, including statements regarding Max Sound's intentions, beliefs, expectations, representations, projections, plans or strategies regarding the future are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, the risks associated with the effect of changing economic conditions, trends in the products markets, variations in the company's cash flow or adequacy of capital resources, market acceptance risks, technical development risks, and other risk factors. The company cautions investors not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this press release. Max Sound disclaims any obligation and does not undertake to update or revise any forward-looking statements in this press release. Expanded and historical information is made available to the public by Max Sound Corporation and its Affiliates on its website or at

Contact Information:

Max Sound Corporation