Ant4,




Thanks for the update.

motion to dismiss

Update: Everything re motion to submit has been submitted and in the hands of the court. Both of us have requested oral argument so I assume the court will grant it. I am very confident it WILL NOT be dismissed.

There appears to be some back and forth between Ant (Fagan) and the Faros. Nothing yet determined by the court on the motion to dismiss. When there is nothing to update there is nothing for ant to pass on.

Must not have gone well IMO, otherwise the ANT would be on the board touting a victory.

Anyone know where we stand in the NJ court? Seems mighty quiet as of late.

Not sure Bret has any Capital Gain to use his tax loss against..........Hopefully he get some degree of health back, brings Nanologix to an end ( BK ) and we all get a conclusion.........

Apparently Brett doesn't need more tax loss or this would have been BK years ago. More time may not change anything.

Yes..unfortunately that's about the best we can hope for........The tax loss against capital gains is a beautiful thing........just a matter of time.

I, for one, would just like to see some kind of resolution. I’d like to open up my brokerage account and NOT see the line with Nanologix on it! Hoping that happens before the end of the year so I can take the loss, a sadder but wiser investor!

Negativity you say? Spewing?............Realistic deductions from what has transpired is what I see. Wish upon a star if you wish............By the way these message boards are for our entertainment........

WOW - why do you keep spewing your negativity on this Board? There are still many investors who believe in the patented N-Assay and RVA and hope for a good outcome.

WOW................... the dream lives on with some posters..........being positive is an attribute for sure but " getting our investment back".....thinking better chance buying lottery tickets..........wishing us all the luck in the world but thinking we need more than that....

Worse case the complaint gets dismissed (doubt it}, 2. we get our investment back, 3rd ant is successful and the patents live to get further developed and we begin a new journey. It might be a forced bankruptcy and then we can take a write off. I think there is enough from over the years that the complaint moves forward and the fate of management is to be determined. imo

I find it interesting and ironic at the same time; posters here blame BB and Nanologix for their losses and feel suckered by management yet here they wait for ant to save the day with a court case that could very well end up only benefiting ant..........

No new information to be found on the status of ants complaint or anything new showing on the pacermonitor. Haven't heard from ant on the board in a month. Checking daily. Have to assume things just moving slowly.

Tomorrow should be the defining day to determine if ants complaint moves forward or not. Wouldn't be surprised if there is another delay for more information. Hope that doesn't happen but the justice system has a tendency to delay, delay and delay. imo

Spikul,





"How many total shares do we together own without the person who is trying to take control?"



when I went looking on total shares I seen a couple sites saying around 162 million....but this below said something about a limit of 200 million shares but that is from 2013. You can thank Bret for not keeping things up to date on share count so who knows what exact the total is.


"Financial Matters

As of 1 April 2013, the company has 122,679,679 shares outstanding of an authorized limit of 200,000,000 shares. Our current monthly operations costs are approximately $42,000. That amount includes the costs of NanoLogix-funded studies, other tests of our products by third parties, and new patent applications. NanoLogix is funded by a combination of revenue from increasing sales, loans to the company by its CEO, and a limited number of private placement stock sales, with investors providing funding in exchange for common stock restricted from market sale for one year from date of issuance. The company does not sell shares on the open market. The Company has received a number of inquiries regarding share compensation to Directors and sales of those shares. All Directors are compensated for their contribution to the Company by payment in restricted shares. The Directors are closely involved with the business of the Company, communicate with the CEO on a daily or near-daily basis, and participate in board of director meetings regularly. All Directors have been personally involved in assisting financially with the needs of the Company, both through personal direct investment and also through facilitation of private placement investment from friends, family, colleagues, and associates who approached the Directors. The Directors have been responsible in this way for the overwhelming majority of funds raised to run the company over the past five years, amounting to roughly 92% of funds raised. To date, none of the shares paid to the Directors, including the CEO, have been sold. All of the share certificates issued to the members of the Board of Directors are still classed as restricted shares and can only be sold under strict SEC Rule 144 guidelines. In summation, there has been no realized monetary gain from the shares received as compensation by the Board of Directors *** the shares cannot be used as collateral for loans, nor can they be classed as a liquid asset. The Board of Directors is independent, with the directors employed individually in professions completely unrelated to the business of NanoLogix. Their work as Directors of the Company has been based upon what they believe to be the potential of the Company, not for any immediate capital gain.

Well written message from someone who pays attention, saw the pain that a failed company exposed, and brought much larger issues to the front..........

Sorry, been off for a while. Had a bit of hospital myself. Doing OK now. Please forgive my need to ask these questions. Tried to open the PDF's, but can't.

What role does Tom Fagan play?

Who is trying to take over the company?

How many shares does he own?

Who is Matthew Lippert?

How many total shares do we together own without the person who is trying to take control?

The house with the stone is the right one. Last time I spoke with Bret he called me while he was up on scaffolding tuck pointing the rock.

All of this is so sad for everyone. Except for the patents, Bret has lost everything he had in life He was a very wealth man and had accomplished much in Europe before coming back to the US and before nnlx. He really believed in the technology and sank everything he had into it.

I was wondered if he had a health issue. It sounds like he almost died. Thanks for the info. I haven't stopped praying, because I believe in the patents as well. The case only started in May.

I don't wish ill for anyone. We can't change the past, only the future. Being angry leads to bitterness which gradually leads to cancer and death. He believed in the company and so did all of us. Forgiveness is a better path. Just remember that it is darkest before the dawn and it can't get much darker. Just keep praying.
Becky Home Ecky

As of today it's still set for 8/19/24. FYI Brets Manor home for sale has dropped the price again to 225k. IMO getting close to what he has in it. I think it was purchased in 2009 for 175k and 225k would still be selling at a loss. No one wants to buy an empty shell. IMO. A developer might buy it for around 180k and finish it off to make it salable IMO. I believe over 14k still due in back taxes.

Yman,



Is it still 8/19/24 or has it been pushed back some more ?


"Looks like the wheels of justice do turn slow. Seems motion to dismiss and reply now have until 8/19/24. Source pacer monitor. Don't be surprised if something is filed to extend a decision even further. Just look how long it took to settle a simple eviction.

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/53516943/FAGAN_v_BARNHISER_et_al

Fagan vs Barnhiser ? Noticed the court case shows Fagan vs barnhiser not Fagan vs barnhizer. Name misspelled.
So who is being sued? Appears everything is filed against "barnhiser". I find it hard to believe they couldn't get the right party named sued. Will this error have any impact?

Omar: Good point of how they are fighting to hang on to the patents. We know they can't raise the cash to move forward so they may be positioning for a piece of ants new company.

Muggo,


"I need some guidance. I find myself in a position where I would like to take some significant tax losses this year for tax reasons. Nanologix is an obvious choice. Given it is now in the Ant/court/whatever limbo, is it possible to declare a loss? If so, what would be the steps? Or do I need to just hang onto my shares until if’s officially over? Any chance of last happening before year’s end?"


You have to decide what is best for you. I'm going wait and see what happens with ANT, if he does start a new company and he has the money to get something rolling I think we could see something worthwhile in PPS in the new company right from the start. It's just turning August, I'm going wait and see what happens in the next few months but it's your choice if you want to bail now. It's interesting how resistant they are with the Patents maybe that is a sign they are worth something maybe more than a Mr.Socko Patent after all ?

DP,


"Does not matter what you, I or anyone else who went down with the ship thinks omar..........maybe it gets to a Judge some day. Maybe the company owns all or a part or zilch............Do you not have a life other than Nanologix and the man who ruined your world ..... B. B.?


If it doesn't matter what others think then why are you even on a message board ? To tell others insults ?

If the loss write off is of the utmost importance to you consider contacting your broker and put up your shares for sale. Who knows how long the current litigation will take or how soon your shares may take to liquidate. I just might buy them.

Hello, all,

I need some guidance. I find myself in a position where I would like to take some significant tax losses this year for tax reasons. Nanologix is an obvious choice. Given it is now in the Ant/court/whatever limbo, is it possible to declare a loss? If so, what would be the steps? Or do I need to just hang onto my shares until if’s officially over? Any chance of last happening before year’s end?

Does not matter what you, I or anyone else who went down with the ship thinks omar..........maybe it gets to a Judge some day. Maybe the company owns all or a part or zilch............Do you not have a life other than Nanologix and the man who ruined your world ..... B. B.?

Who thinks the Patents belong to the company ?



Recently Ant posted this......"There are acceptions to the typical rule such as who paid for the materials, patent fees, if other employees involved, etc. In this case from what I understand the company paid for the materials, patent fees, there were other employees involved, it was developed in the company facility, etc. Further there are multiple PR's released by the company that state "we (the company) are filing a patent" , the company was granted the patent", etc etc etc. If thats not enough, the 2 guys who are claiming ownership of the patent either sat back (Faro) and let the other (BB) destroy the company and then abandoned it. In my opinion and of attorney's I've consulted with there is no way that this court or a Delaware court will not conclude that the patents are the property of the company."


Who thinks Faro and BB did all the work on their own and the company had no involvement ? Didn't we have releases for years saying things that sounded like Nanologix owned the Patents ? Did we ever see either BB or Faro straight out say they did it all without anything from the company ? If they did it all on their own then why didn't they just start their own company with "their" tech ? They should be ashamed of themselves. Other than DP I don't think anyone here will defend them.

DP,





If you think I'm interesting to watch, you should see the guy I'm watching he said this a while back( See below).....Why would anyone Thank Bret the way he did this company is someone special for sure !



""Super great news. AS I wrote awhile back, we should get some news near beginning of new year.....and did we ever......A. Flat pack ramping back up. B. Creating new product with partner. C. Working toward helping PPS with stock listing on public exchange......Thank You Bret

DP,





So I guess you think the patents belong to Faro and BB, and all those releases they put out for years say for certain Faro and BB are the owners of the patents and not the company ? I think you should request from Ant that when he starts that new company to not participate since that would be saying you are blaming someone else.




From Ant's post...
"There are acceptions to the typical rule such as who paid for the materials, patent fees, if other employees involved, etc. In this case from what I understand the company paid for the materials, patent fees, there were other employees involved, it was developed in the company facility, etc. "Further there are multiple PR's released by the company that state "we (the company) are filing a patent" , the company was granted the patent", etc etc etc. If thats not enough, the 2 guys who are claiming ownership of the patent either sat back (Faro) and let the other (BB) destroy the company and then abandoned it"

Poor omar..........just needs to blame others for his poor investment decisions.

ANt4,



"There are acceptions to the typical rule such as who paid for the materials, patent fees, if other employees involved, etc. In this case from what I understand the company paid for the materials, patent fees, there were other employees involved, it was developed in the company facility, etc. "Further there are multiple PR's released by the company that state "we (the company) are filing a patent" , the company was granted the patent", etc etc etc. If thats not enough, the 2 guys who are claiming ownership of the patent either sat back (Faro) and let the other (BB) destroy the company and then abandoned it"



Even with this below it says development work performed in the Nanologix Laboratory in Hubbard, ohio. It's a slap in the face to the shareholders ! I thought CEO and directors of a company would be looking out for the best interest of the shareholders not themselves.





NanoLogix Develops Sub 1-Hour Coronavirus 19 Detection Technology and Welcomes James Rogers, PhD as Chief Science Officer
by NanoLogix | May 3, 2020
Last week NanoLogix completed development testing of a unique Coronavirus (COVID-19) detection technology with sub 1-hour results and exceptional sensitivity and accuracy. The technology has the potential to be configured as a Point of Care (POC) and also for individual consumer use. The development work was performed in the NanoLogix Laboratory in Hubbard, Ohio. More information on the technology will be released in the near future.

I think Rodgers found out about money being owed, patents, and other things that we are not aware of.

He wanted to keep his reputation and bailed quickly.

Seeing that there no longer is a company it's hard to imagine any nondisclosure would still have merit.

I'd want to talk to all the revolving door hires to include Jim Rodger and Hank if they are able and willing to speak. Just guessing Rodgers got screwed the most.

Nope

John Tracy.......I tried speaking to him about Nanologix, as he lived in the next town to mine but he said he could not......... for what that is worth

Leroy,





Is John Tracy under some kind of agreement to not talk about the company ?

Ant, Talk to John Tracy.

Ant, I think this question has been asked in one form or another, but I don't know that I've seen your thoughts on it.
Do you hope that you can make these patents valuable somehow?
Or, quite different, do you actually have some specific knowledge that these patents/the NNLX tests - work, can make money, will prove to be an improvement on today's Covid tests, etc.? (BTW are covid tests really a big deal anymore? Is a slight improvement over a previous test a big difference?)
Anyhow - I'm just asking if this is your hope, or you have some specific knowledge that these tests work and can be sold. Thanks.

Ant4,




From 2019... sounds like the N-assay is own by Nanologix




NIH Grant Application Submitted for

Pre-test Development Study

NanoLogix is pleased to provide this update to our August 2018 statement of coordinated development activity with a California-based Biotechnology firm. The planning for a research study for development of a rapid pre-test for use with the patented Nanologix N-Assay bacteria diagnostic is proceeding, with staff selections completed, letters of recomendation from noted medical authorites written, and the submission last week of the grant application for the study to the NIH by our Silicon-Valley partner. The research study is planned for two major Houston hospitals, funded from both Federal Grants and a raise of investment capital.
The personnel agreeing to participate in the study are seven MDs, two research nurses, two microbiologists, at least two laboratory technicians, and the CEO of the California Biotechnology company. NanoLogix personnel and the CEO of the Biotechnology company have signed a mutual non-disclosure agreement limiting what can presently be revealed but once funding has been obtained and the study registered with the FDA and initiated, the identity of the pre-test development company should be available as public knowledge.

The purpose of the pre-test use with the N-Assay is to have a pre-test that will indicate the presence of a specific bacteria with minutes, for which the N-Assay can then be used to rapidly determine both the concentration of the bacteria and its sensitivity to various antibiotics, furnishing Point of Care (POC) personnel the ability to effectively treat the patient with the specific antibiotic required. This development will significantly reduce reliance upon broad-spectrum antibiotics, which contribute to the major worldwide problem of the development of antibiotic-resistance for many bacteria.

The current focus of this NIH grant application is on Group B Streptoccus (GBS). We are currently discussng Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) diagnostic test development with other companies and plan to proceed concurrently with studies for that development.

NanoLogix has also agreed to fund an existing laboratory in Houston currently in use as a clinical laboratory for the medical group associated with Dr Jonathan Faro. This lab will be crucial to the testing of patient samples during the upcoming study.

Although our partner has a very successful record of receiving grants for development, neither NanoLogix nor our partner in the GBS pretest development can guarantee that the NIH grant will be awarded for this project. With that in mind, nanoLogix is continuing to pursue alternative funding for both the GBS and UTI pretest development, including international sale or licensing of the FlatPack extended-life petri plate packaging technology.

Further updates will occur as warranted.

Ant4,


Here is another release in 2014....sounded like N-Assay is the company.



https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140519006833/en/NanoLogix-Welcomes-VP-for-Sales-and-Marketing

"Jonathan Faro, MD., of Woman’s Hospital of Texas in Houston, Is presenting a poster titled “Simultaneous Identification of Select Microbial Pathogens and Determination of Antimicrobial Resistance by a Unique Assay” in poster session 210, at display position 2564 in the Poster Hall of the ASM exhibition on 20 May. The technology referenced in the poster is NanoLogix’s patent-pending “N-Assay” Multiwell Microplate, a unique ELISA assay that ongoing research to date has shown enables detection and identification of bacteria and yeasts rapidly and with greater sensitivity than any other diagnostic currently available."

Ant: Keep up the pressure. Was Bret ever served and if not do you believe a default judgement will be rendered against him?

Ant; Have you placed a dollar figure on what you feel these Patents are worth?...Million, tens or hundreds of?

Yman.

There are acceptions to the typical rule such as who paid for the materials, patent fees, if other employees involved, etc. In this case from what I understand the company paid for the materials, patent fees, there were other employees involved, it was developed in the company facility, etc. Further there are multiple PR's released by the company that state "we (the company) are filing a patent" , the company was granted the patent", etc etc etc. If thats not enough, the 2 guys who are claiming ownership of the patent either sat back (Faro) and let the other (BB) destroy the company and then abandoned it. In my opinion and of attorney's I've consulted with there is no way that this court or a Delaware court will not conclude that the patents are the property of the company.

The risk they are taking is I would assume the shareholders would be willing to negotiate an agreement prior to the court's determination which would provide them compensation and possibly retaining certain rights to the IP, however if its determined the company owns the IP they will receive nothing. I can assure you I am spending considerable time and money on this litigation and am in it to win it.

Omar: What concerns me is the word "typically". I'm guessing they will say this is/was not a typical situation leading to further delays. Does anyone know if Bret ever got served?

ANt4,



"Work-For-Hire Doctrine & Corporate Officers. Under the work-for-hire doctrine, an employee also serving as a corporate officer typically has a fiduciary duty to assign the patent rights for inventions created during his/her tenure to the company. To do otherwise would be a clear violation of his/her duties as an employee and a fiduciary not to interfere with corporate operations.



I don't think they cared to do the responsible thing. I would guess they were in it for themselves, shareholders pretty much meant nothing to them.