Bourque Industries Inc (BORK)

[KZMike]

MQ-

Well said and accurate in this post and other posts you have made following this.

As a QA Mgr. responsible for testing and evaluating materials for a vendor to Boeing. I was well aware of 'patent implications'. Boeing required all materials be submitted for testing and evaluation prior to being used in production parts on their aircraft.

Materials/Specifications that utilized proprietary 'ingredients' were required to be approved by submitting samples and a 'list of ingredients'.

To this day, that vendor is still a sole source vendor for at least two Boeing Material Specifications for more than 3 decades. . . I also know that several 'competitors' have tried for two of those decades to replicate those materials as specified by Boeing. Of this I am sure, as I was hired by a competitor and they spent considerable time and effort in gaining a 'foothold' for providing that material. . . and were never able to replicate the required results.

The company that 'holds' the sole source for those specs, purposely did not patent those materials for fear of putting to much info 'out in the public domain'

IMO the patent that BORK holds likely gives little if any info on how to reverse engineer and is likely meant to 'scare off' and/or and or mis-direct competing efforts. I doubt that any at BORK care about the validity one way or other of "their" patent. . . having said that any future that BORK may envisage, may also change that view. . .