Gabriel Technologies Corp. (fka GWLKQ)

[sidedraft]

GWLKQ Revoked by SEC

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2014/34-71434.pdf

[Renee]

GWLK changed to GWLKQ: Bankruptcy.

http://www.otcbb.com/asp/dailylist_detail.asp?d=03/04/2013&mkt_ctg=NON-OTCBB

[milky milk]

Q's reply brief.

Filing under seal - There looked like there could be something in this pdf of interest.
http://www.mediafire.com/?36ompi9jd7br1ug

Q's reply brief. Tons of reading.
http://www.mediafire.com/?l5fx344qopkwo1s

[milky milk]

G's response to Q PSJ request (from the yahoo MB's)

Here ya go...

http://www.mediafire.com/?vtp87tut04y7ieu

Just got through 3 pages and already love it.


From pages 7 and 8

Mr. Angus, moreover, sets the record straight regarding Qualcomm’s supposed “blunt[]
refus[al] [of] Plaintiffs’ extortionate settlement demands.”

From early 2007 through mid-2008 Gabriel and Qualcomm
engaged in settlement discussions, which I attended. During those
discussions, Gabriel provided Qualcomm substantial evidence of
misappropriation, including in the form of detailed slide presentations to which I contributed. Qualcomm responded to the
first of these slide presentations with its own presentation. I
understand that Qualcomm has stated that during the settlement
discussions, Qualcomm disagreed that Locate had contributed
anything under the 1999 Agreement and “flatly” refused to settle.
In fact, at different times, two different counsel for Qualcomm, Mr.
Greenhaus and Robert Haslam, indicated to me that they believed
Gabriel’s position had merit and I heard Mr. Haslam tell our
counsel that he could obtain a substantial settlement for Gabriel.

Interesting to say the least

[milky milk]

Did a little more reading and came across Hobson's Choice. I have never heard of that before (showing my ignorance)

From Wiki

A Hobson's choice is a free choice in which only one option is offered. As a person may refuse to take that option, the choice is therefore between taking the option or not; "take it or leave it".

The next lines after reading it in the filing say "either address Plaintiffs’ misplaced arguments on the merits
and waive well-founded objections to Plaintiffs’ improper evidence or object to Plaintiffs’
improper evidence and leave some of Plaintiffs’ arguments unrebutted."

Catch-22 maybe??? Im assuming that they need more than 10 pages to reply to G's brief that we asked for an extension for.

A little more - "... Plaintiffs’ affidavits are so rife with
inadmissible testimony that, absent leave of Court, the majority of Defendants’ reply brief would
be filled with evidentiary objections rather than addressing the merits of Plaintiffs’ opposition
brief. Defendants should not have to choose between objecting to clearly inadmissible evidence
and refuting Plaintiffs’ meritless arguments. Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request leave
to file a separate document containing objections to the affidavits submitted by Plaintiffs."

And Lastly - "...As required, Defendants have met and conferred with Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs will not
agree to allow Defendants to file separate evidentiary objections."

something else that I learned (showing my ignorance once again)

LEAVE OF COURT. The grant by the court of something, which, without such grant it would have been unlawful to do.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionar...

"...would have been unlawful to do"

I kind of chuckled at that part. So then is it unlawful to submit their objections with more than 10 pages? Is that why they need more "room" so they can "address Plaintiffs’ misplaced arguments on the merits
and waive well-founded objections to Plaintiffs’ improper evidence" AND "object to Plaintiffs’
improper evidence" WHILE not leaving some of the Plaintiffs arguments "unrebutted".

Yall know MORE than me, so help me understand this one.

[milky milk]

Q is mad about something...LINK INSIDE

http://www.mediafire.com/?silsoe6o6d7turl

OK did I miss something? It sounds like Judge Dembim ruled on something last week, and now Q is mad. It has to do with the evidence provided by G. You know...the PSJ brief that Q wouldn't let G get an extension on. Not discovery, but it does sound like Q has to make a choice and that either way it leads them down a road they dont want to go down.

It was a brief scan on my part so I may be wrong, but it sounds like Q is not happy.

DISCUSS...

[milky milk]

OK just an update on the latest. The discovery hearing has come and gone, but no word yet on what the verdict is.

Q is pushing the Partial Summary Judgement issue right now, and G is fighting it.

At some point I will be copying over threads from teh Yahoo MB because some of them keep getting deleted.

[milky milk]

Anyone out there??? I know there are a few people on ther YMB but the links started to dissapear. SO I will dual post here and on the YMB.

A ton has happened since the last post. I have only been following since the latter part of 2010. Here are the cliffs. They may not be in the correct order so forgive me.

Q and G have battle back and forth about trade secrets and how broad G has been with their description of them. The court ordered that G put aside $800k for Q's legal fees if it is found that this lawsuit is frivolus. One of Q's atty's said that hopefully G cant post the bond and this case will be over with. Im not going to search for the actual quote, but is was something like that. G posted the $800k bond.

In early 2011, G filed a motion to compel for discovery (or something like that) and according to the people over at the YMB, that filing was huge. All sorts of detail, expert testimony etc... Very good reading.

A few months later Judge Anello(sp) and Judge Porter were replaced by Judge Bitallia(sp) and Judge Dembin. Judge Dembin allowed "limited" discovery of one or 2 patents of G's choosing (at least that is the way I read it). G only chose one, the 277 patent I dont have the entire name of the patent. Through the discovery of this patent, there have been numrous depositions, and more arguements about how general G is being when it comes to the trade secrets.

Finally G submitted details about the trade secrets including the source code and some possible contridictions in previous sworn testimony. Q filed their response this past week (9-21 i think)

Judge Dembin is going to rule on the findings of this "limited" discovery exercise. I don't think he said that if he likes what he see's form G that he will open it up to full discovery.

So that is where we are now. This week Judge Dembin will hold a conference with the atty's about how to proceed.

Here is a link to a lot of the filings that have been publicly released by the PACER website.

ENJOY!!!

http://www.mediafire.com/?3hxrsibd88pi3

[INDY]

CHART:

[INDY]

WEBSITE:

http://www.gabrieltechnologies.com

[INDY]

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Gabriel Technologies Corp.
4538 S. 140th Street
Omaha, NE 68137

Phone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

[INDY]

TRADE DATA 9/22/08:

Trade Data / Last Trade 09/22/2008
Last Sale 0.705 Change +0.005
% Change +0.71 Tick Up
Daily High 0.71 Daily Low 0.68
Opening Price 0.70 Volume 72,638
52 wk. High 1.05 52 wk. Low 0.20
Prev Close 0.70 Dividend 0.00
Yield 0.00 Beta Coefficient 0.45

[Defuser]

Anybody hearing anything? $.90 today with a steady increase.

[bamboojoe]

I read the same thing about the accounting firm and audit on the other board. How do we know they are doing an audit? I agree it appears some are growing impatient, but i've been around long enough that things take much longer in the real world. I mainly concerned that it does happen!!!! Good point on NO lawsuit has been filed...

[1jay]

I think some folks are growing impatient. The facts show there is no lawsuit and the hold up is the new accounting firm. Once they get the factual numbers and a filing, we should see some action. All of this is in my opinion, but all the reading and other info looks like this may be the case. All in all, I bought more in the 70's and 80's and will see how it shakes out!

[bamboojoe]

Holding strong in an ugly market. Did you read the Yahoo board? What do you think?

[1jay]

Nice steady upward momentum.

[1jay]

Another green day! I will never complain about positive momentum with slow steady gains.

[1jay]

This thing made a nice little run at the end of day today closing up nicely. This could be looking for a spike up tomorrow and maybe make a run!

[bamboojoe]

I was thinking about doing the same. The volume has picked up and the stock is starting to develope a chart.

[1jay]

I actually bought in today as it appears to have some life and is making a run.

[bamboojoe]

Anyone out there following this stock?

[Golden Cross]

guess no body watching

[Golden Cross]

GWLK Gabriel Technologies to Provide Tracking Services for U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Test Site
Business Wire - June 1, 2006 7:59 AM (EDT)

OMAHA, Neb., Jun 01, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Gabriel Technologies Corp. (OTCBB:GWLK) announced today that its subsidiary Trace Technologies has been selected to provide location-based services for the U.S. Department of Energy's Nevada Test Site (NTS).

The deal will provide vehicular/asset tracking and emergency responder tracking in support of the site's C4VAS project focused on integrating all radar, mapping and tracking for the NTS into an integrated display solution.

The initial phase of this project is focused on tracking of vehicles and emergency responders. However, several other site organizations have already requested use of the Trace Location Services to fulfill a variety of needs.

Moe Shanley, president of Trace Technologies, said, "This DOE contract will run across the NTS' private ReFLEX two-way wireless network. This makes the NTS an excellent candidate for Trace Location Services by allowing for tracking and locating in even the most remote portions of the site, which is approximately the size of Rhode Island. As the only company able to provide location-based services over the ReFLEX network with a portable device, Trace is uniquely qualified to meet the site's needs.

"We are looking forward to proving our technology and service center solution for secure campuses such as the Nevada Test Site, as it represents a key target market. This is a start to what we believe will be a long-term relationship with the U.S. Department of Energy," Shanley said.

About Trace Technologies

Trace Technologies, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Gabriel Technologies Corporation. Trace location tracking provides enhanced location services to devices supporting Qualcomm's SnapTrack(TM) assisted-GPS technology. Subscribers and licensees pay a fee to access the Trace SnapTrack-based location information to determine the precise location of enabled devices, such as the Trace Asset Tag. The company works with a number of value-added resellers and distribution partners to give the technology a greater reach of the tracking services market. Trace Technologies' mission is to provide the highest quality security solutions available by creating innovation, proven technologies that can be implemented on a realistic basis. The company is headquartered in Omaha, Neb., with satellite offices in Seattle, Wash., and Dallas, Texas. For more information, visit http://www.trace-tech.net.

About Gabriel Technologies

Gabriel Technologies is a leading provider of proprietary solutions in three rapidly growing segments of the homeland security market - asset tracking, physical security and secure identity management for physical and logical access control. The company intends to provide the highest quality security products available by creating innovative, proven technologies that can be implemented on a realistic basis. Gabriel Technologies develops, manufactures and sells a series of technically advanced systems in the physical locking systems for the transportation and shipping industries through the WAR-LOK(TM) brand; GPS-assisted asset tracking through Trace Technologies; and biometric security products through Digital Defense Group. Security issues have evolved substantially in recent years due to increasing risks from identity theft, larceny and terrorism.

Further information can be found at http://www.gabrieltechnologies.com. For more information about Gabriel, contact Daniel Leonard at [phone].

An investment profile on Gabriel can be found at http://www.hawkassociates.com/gabriel/profile.php.

Investors may contact Frank Hawkins or Julie Marshall, Hawk Associates, at [phone], e-mail: [e-mail]. An online investor relations kit containing Gabriel Technologies' press releases, SEC filings, current Level II price quotes, interactive Java stock charts and other useful information for investors can be found at http://www.hawkassociates.com and http://www.americanmicrocaps.com.

Forward-Looking Statements: Investors are cautioned that certain statements contained in this document are "Forward-Looking Statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include statements which are predictive in nature, which depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, which include words such as "believes," "anticipates," "intends," "plans," "expects" and similar expressions. In addition, any statements concerning future financial performance (including future revenues, earnings or growth rates), ongoing business strategies or prospects and possible future Gabriel actions, which may be provided by management, are also forward-looking statements as defined by the act. These statements are not guarantees of future performance.

SOURCE: Gabriel Technologies Corp.

Hawk Associates, Inc.
Frank N. Hawkins, Jr., 305-451-1888
or
Julie Marshall, 305-451-1888
E-mail: [e-mail]
http://www.hawkassociates.com
http://www.americanmicrocaps.com

Copyright Business Wire 2006