Health Discovery Corp (HDVY)

[LocWolf]

OK, let us dream a bit? What do you say that as I indicated that Marty Delmonte has made a deal with George and that they have completed past 10-Q filings and that Frazier & Deeter, LLC has completed or is close to completing both 10-K filings.

Look even though Marty resigned he has many years working with George and that to me is hard to keep two that were once close from completing what they had hope to do since involved in HDC many years ago.

They need each other in order to make this work and also need their most recent CPA Firm - Frazier & Deeter, LLC.

I see talk over on Yahoo about a conversion ratio involving Intel shares in exchange for what we are holding? So let us say we have a settlement and the diluted shares come to 800 million and the settlement is for $800,000,000.00. Some were saying that Intel would be forced to pay HDC's legal fees. Now that may be very true but also believe that the Attorney's could receive up to 40% of that settlement.

So, as I see it I would be happy with a straight conversion of each stock I hold for .50 to $1.00 to be converted to Intel stock. I figure in another year or two Intel stock will be worth $50.00 per share....so it would be 31-62 HDC shares for 1 INTC share.

[LocWolf]

This probably won't matter to this message board but we had 39 days of Fact Discovery left from the old case and JA extended that 21 more days. Yes I mentioned this prior but what I didn't mention was that we had 46 days of Expert Discovery left from the old case and that was extended by 14 days.

[LocWolf]

re: Yahoo message board by GoodStuff
Can anyone explain why they are still referring to the new case # 6:22-cv-00356 ? The original is 6:20-cv-00666. It says JA is taking it under advisement. Shouldn’t JA have ruled on this before setting the schedule ? THX
_________________________________

GS...no doubt everyone has noticed that and even JA far more than all of us however, for JA to act in a neutral manner he probably needs to be cautious on how to introduce that aspect. I sincerely feel he has already made up his mind to allow HDC to use all evidence dating back to the 6:20-vc-00666 case history especially when considering how JA is using and considering the remaining Fact Discovery time. The case number may remain 6:22-cv--00356 and we should not be concerned as long as we get to use all the past documentations from the original court case and the two plus years of possible liability award.

As I see things investors here may feel that Intel has the upper hand with all this stalling but I tend to differ meaning HDC has also had additional time to work on any weak areas they may see within themselves and also Intel's block walls that are looking weaker as time move along.

Another thingy about the PATB having that final say prior. Yes I doubt the USPTO will have much to say simply because Intel (in my words/thoughts) are done with the USPTO and it is onward to the U.S. Appeals Court which is about the USPTO structure.

Judge Albright will carry the football and body block everyone expect the U.S Appeals Court as they stand taller than JA or the USPTO Director.

Something I don't think anyone here (so far) has thought about, what is going to transpire in recognition and Publicity for the Attorney's and Firm of the winning team

[king oil]

Jury selection November 27

[Good Sport]

Thanks Loc. Yea after reading that post by digDeeper17 I'm getting the very strong feeling that the pinch is on and this is gonna be forced into trading again. I originally thought this would never trade until the law suit is over.

[LocWolf]

I'm not sure but an earlier post here....... by "Digdeeper17"

Not many warm fuzzies here .. It would appear vennwest is getting what they asked for ...
But what is the timeframe ? Cant be good as it clouds any finalization with Intel ..
Who is .. imo .. still stalling as they realize HDVY remains in a pickle .. I believe 2 months left on this expert exchange ... And poof out o biz .... Is how i read it .. ymmv Which if others have followed the loans means a select few still control the patents (cuz they loaned $$ to HDVY for past several years {see filings} ) And shareholders get nothing ... That would have to be worse case .. And means if hdvy is to continue .. financing using the approx 250 mill mill shares left in the 900 mill authorized and filings must be done pretty quickly here .. Or settlement / buyout ... Terms of which have to be getting worse every day ...

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171594835
_______________________
Then my post ..... the Rule will become effective 60 days following publication of the amendments in the Federal Register. The Rule will have a general compliance date that is nine months after the effective date as well as a compliance date that is two years after the effective date regarding provisions to require an issuer’s financial information for the last two fiscal years to be current and publicly available.....or is June 28, 2023 THE ABSOLUTE DEADLINE?

9/28/21 compliance date starts? <<<<< This is when compliance date stated correct...and if so do we have until 9/28/23 to file the past SEC FILINGS?

Aside from that

07/22/22____ Zero shares traded as seen by us traders.
07/21/22____ 2 million share traded.
07/20/22____ 6 Million shares traded - Was that Citadel trying to unload?
10/19/22____ Jim Murphy resigns.
06/22/22____ Marty Delmonte resigns.

OK... it seems to me that the other that must resign as director would be the CEO's daughter Colleen. That would call for 3 directors to be replaced and hopefully satisfy the concerns within this area.

Comments anyone?
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171598387

All the more reason for HDC to file any time now!!

[Good Sport]

Earlier today Chipster over on stocktwits brought up a good question regarding the expert trading limits rule of 18 months. Just wondering if anyone here has any idea or experiences on what will happen to our HDVY shares etc if it is delisted? Could this be the match lit under the ball to get the stock trading again?

I copied that stocktwits post below...

Chipster
11:02 AM

$HDVY "I just read that a stock can only be on the expert market for 18 months and then it gets delisted. If the trail is in October that's getting close to the 18 months.
What does that mean for the share holder if it gets delisted from the expert market?"

[LocWolf]

I've waited a tad over 5 hours for someone else to post this link that was done by "BolliverShagnasty" in the HDVY thread over at Stocktwits.

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AAp6QZmwXxatsYU&id=658845AE0CC93963%2188167&cid=658845AE0CC93963&parId=root&parQt=sharedby&o=OneUp

[LocWolf]

I just noted the Fact Discovery started today and is for 60 days. I thought I recalled something I listened to in the last two or three court sessions involving HDC/Intel's Attorneys talking so I listen to the recordings. It seems originally that around 7 months of Fact Discovery was at hand and since JA dismissed the case back due to Alice and her step sister, Intel stated that 39 days where left for Fact Discovery. JA threw out a 60 day number and Intel felt 60 days where still too much but as you see HDC does have 60 days instead of just the 39 that were left.

...so that means we will be able to use the court case documentations from 6:20-cv-0666 I believe?

[king oil]

Thanks Loc for all the info. It’s good to at least see things moving along. I think Intel will either continue to follow the path for delays or finally decide to throw in the towel and settle. Delay tactics have worked well for them all along so I’m guessing they’ll keep doing that as long as possible.

[LocWolf]

I do not have the software to convert documents anymore but .....

April 17, 2023 Fact Discovery opens; deadline to serve Initial Disclosures per
Rule 26(a).

May 7, 2023 Deadline for the second of two meet and confers to discuss
narrowing the number of claims asserted and prior art references
at issue to triable limits. If it helps the parties determine these
limits, the parties are encouraged to contact the Court’s law clerk
for an estimate of the amount of trial time anticipated per side.
The parties shall file a Joint Report within 5 business days
regarding the results of the meet and confer.

May 29, 2023 Deadline to serve Final Infringement and Invalidity Contentions.
After this date, leave of Court is required for any amendment to
infringement or invalidity contentions. This deadline does not
relieve the parties of their obligation to seasonably amend if new
information is identified after initial contentions.

June 16, 2023 Close of Fact Discovery.

June 30, 2023 Opening Expert Reports: Plaintiff may serve an infringement
report and a damages report; Defendant may serve an invalidity
report.

July 28, 2023 Rebuttal Expert Reports: Plaintiff may rebut Defendant's
invalidity report; Defendant may rebut Plaintiff's infringement
and damages reports.

August 14, 2023 Close of Expert Discovery.

August 25, 2023 Dispositive motion deadline and Daubert motion deadline.
See General Issues Note #7 regarding providing copies of the
briefing to the Court and the technical advisor (if appointed).

September 8, 2023 Serve Pretrial Disclosures (jury instructions, exhibits lists,
witness lists, discovery and deposition designations).

September 15, 2023 Serve objections to pretrial disclosures/rebuttal disclosures

October 6, 2023 Serve objections to rebuttal disclosures; file Motions in limine.

October 13, 2023 File Joint Pretrial Order and Pretrial Submissions (jury
instructions, exhibits lists, witness lists, discovery and deposition
designations); file oppositions to motions in limine.

October 20, 2023 File Notice of Request for Daily Transcript or Real Time
Reporting. If a daily transcript or real time reporting of court
proceedings is requested for trial, the party or parties making
said request shall file a notice with the Court and email the Court
Reporter, Kristie Davis at [e-mail].
Deadline to meet and confer regarding remaining objections and
disputes on motions in limine.

October 2, 2023 Parties to jointly email the Court’s law clerk (see OGP at 1) to
confirm their pretrial conference and trial dates.

November 10, 2023. File joint notice identifying remaining objections to pretrial
disclosures and disputes on motions in limine.

November 14, 2023. Final Pretrial Conference. Held in person unless otherwise
requested.

November 27, 2023. Jury Selection/Trial.

You better believe these dates will change again as many twists and turns and unknown things happen from day to day.

[LocWolf]

Thank you "Good Sport"..I was surprised to see another document this soon and it just looks like the court filed in 4 dates being 10/2, 11/10, 11/14 and Jury selection /Trial on 11/27/23.

I like how the beginning reads more so in this document than from #56 the part where HDC filed a request to use original case number. YES...it is on both but front and center on #57 doc.

[LocWolf]

On 4/10/23 Texas Court ... The parties shall file a motion to enter an agreed First Amended Scheduling Order. If the parties cannot agree, the parties shall submit a separate join t motion for entry of a First Amended Scheduling Order briefly setting forth their respective positions on items where they cannot agree. Absent agreement of the parties, the plaintiff shall be responsible for the timely submission of this and other joint filings.
_____________________________

4/17/23 Fact Discovery opens; deadline to serve Initial Disclosures per Rule 26(a).

[Good Sport]

CourtListener Docket Alert
1 New Entry in Health Discovery Corporation v. Intel Corporation (6:22-cv-00356)
District Court, W.D. Texas

#57 Document

Number Date Filed Description Download PDF
57 Apr 17, 2023 Scheduling Order From RECAP with PACER fallback

[king oil]

Final Pretrial conference scheduled for October 26.

[LocWolf]

Yes King HDC needs to get current but how?

It make perfect sense that Marty Delmonte must come back into the picture for several reasons. I believe he handled all the affairs involving past 10k filings. The company that HDC used to check through and certify the paperwork to submit to the SEC must be the same identity as before since they have past records involving HDC and of course Marty must have worked with helping with the documents for that firm. Another thought is that since we have seen what Marty has said in his resignation email/phone call I tend to believe that Vennwest would not have a problem with Marty coming back into the picture. I do have concerns that Marty will want (and he should) have some type of guarantee/up front monies and not lip service if he so decided to help HDC/George. Even though Marty should not get involved again he still has a vast history working with George plus a high stake and investment involving every direction that HDC has gone through.

Someone must present a complicated mess of paperwork to whoever might do the audit and the reasoning that Marty should be the one is clear but George may have wrenched the paperwork up too severely that Marty won't help him. Now of course since we had gone through a 10-k problem several years ago is the main reason George should use the same accounting firm.

This is a high order but think about it, some of what I mentioned might be tough but we need some type of positive results in this area....so, could Vennwest actually help HDC and us shareholders?

Just my thoughts but something to think about.

[king oil]

HDC really needs to get current so that the stock can trade. They will need more cash to keep fighting Intel.

[LocWolf]

Good Sport...let me first thank you for posting the correct Doc which is "56" as I was totally wrong. I have no clue how I screwed that up but believe a month ago I confused the HDC/Vennwest case with JA court .

I know I owe David 756 over on Stocktwits an apology and if I recall possible GoodStuff over on Yahoo. Not sure if that is you but know I'm sorry as I thought the people behind these two aliases were a day late and a dollar short but it was me that was late, lost and many dollars short.

I'm glad Chazzy is posting....

I just printed out document #56 so no doubt 57 will be next? well depending on how high I can count. At any rate I'm ok with being wrong but I don't really wanna be harsh especially with some of us being here for so many years.

We all have taken a beating and are tired and perhaps I was never smart enough to know when to give up so onward we will go.

We need HDC to become current and no doubt HDC is fully aware that if they get that done the stock price will rise.

Let me go and read doc #56 thank you again.

[Good Sport]

Loc,
Were only up to Document #56 so far which was just updated on Court Listener yesterday. Regarding to an order for scheduling.

[LocWolf]

Good Sport...not sure if anyone is moderating this thread anymore.

As for documents in Texas Court when available look for # 63

[LocWolf]

Hello Alan....thank you for clarifying about the servers. The article (the little that I read) did seem like they were dropping an area of business that wasn't the main course or didn't make enough money but I did mean as I wrote it I actually thought they were getting out of the server business and no doubt your post clearly sets me straight on what is really happening...thank you as always.

I gather you have seen (possibly) how Intel is whipping HDC again? I can't believe everything that has happen in the life of HDC.

[Good Sport]

PACER has new update out:
#56
Whoops just saw earlier duplicate. Please delete this.

[alan81]

This is Intel branded server boxes. Intel will still make most of the server CPU's sold to other companies (like hp) that build server boxes. This was a small business where Intel competed with their customers, so perhaps a good thing they are getting out. I don't see this as much of a big deal.
Alan

[LocWolf]

The mighty Intel?

https://www.servethehome.com/breaking-intel-exiting-the-server-business-selling-to-mitac/

[LocWolf]

More news....Document filed "today 4/14/23" Texas Court case 6:22-cv-356

Not sure when we will be able to access this since the weekend is here?

[ou71764]

LocWolf, thanks for the info and keeping us up to date on developments. I wish I could hide HDVY from my screen when I log onto my brokerage account. Maybe things will still work out, but I suspect we're toast.

[LocWolf]

Straight from the source, life of an Appeal......

https://cafc.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/Life-of-Appeal.png


https://cafc.uscourts.gov/home/case-information/opinions-orders/

[LocWolf]

King...I'm sure you also noticed the 3/28 date with Intel's filing the USPTO. So next on 4/10/23 HDC/Vennwest settlement discussions? So from that we learn the next discussions with Vennwest will be on 4/25/23 and that our Attorneys may discuss certain other areas depending on signing a NDA. Now doesn't that kinda let your mind wonder, wonder if things might be said referencing Intel???.

[LocWolf]

Stonemoney...I think Intel is just being respectful to send information to the USPTO Director but their real intent is to settle this in the district court of appeals. I think by doing so it may handcuff the USPTO Director and stop Judge Albright from moving forward.
In short I believe we may also see Alice her nasty sister rise from the ashes again

[Stonemoney]

I noticed the date is March 28 th & still no response.

[LocWolf]

Remember..... "Dissenting Opinion"

It should be noted, however, that the decision was split 2-to-1, where Judge Garth D. Baer broke from the majority in dissent.

Judge Baer argued that “Petitioner explained, with support from its expert … that its proposed addition of Hocking’s vector weight ranking criteria ‘applies a known technique (Hocking’s variable selection) to a known device (Kohavi’s RFE method using Boser’s SVM) which is ready for improvement to yield predictable results.’ ” Intel Corp., IPR2021-00552, Final Written Decision at 41-42 (citing KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007)).

Because of this, Judge Baer agreed that the claimed invention ’959 was nothing more than an obvious combination of known techniques applied to a known device, yielding only predictable results and thus obvious under KSR’s framework. Id. at 42.
_________________________

[LocWolf]

USPTO recent Filing - IPR2021-00550

_____________Notice: notice of appeal_______________

https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-web/#/search/documents?proceedingNumber=IPR2021-00550

[LocWolf]

Say what?....those words blew my socks right out through the bottoms of my shoes?

First words/thoughts? is Intel setting up for another Supreme Court decision far beyond the PTAB and Texas Court?

Is it at all possible that Intel had this planned anyways?

Now you recall from the Zoom 2/17 discussions that both parties were talking about a a time line to gather information to submit together to Texas Court - JA's Clerks.

Who above Intel's Attorney that handled the 2/17 Zoom dealing is pulling the strings?

I can't help but believe that in some fashion our patent might really be worth Billions? I don't see how but how can we now not think so? If so maybe Intel knew all along that Vennwest might side with HDC and support the end results in teaming together?

What in the world are our Attorney's now thinking?

Maybe there is now a massive reason for all parties involved in HDC to come together and get this stock trading again?

All longs here probably feel as I do which is how in the hell can this get deeper and deeper as we have seen. This company/stock is making massive history yet has no money but has pulled Intel's pants down to around their ankles.

I never thought I would see a day like this with Intel crying back to the PTAB so my thoughts are pressure is going to come from far above again so grab your underwear and hold on.

I haven't pulled any documents nor were anything at the Texas Court System but believe a venue change will happen soon enough. I wonder if it is odd that JA hasn't at least determined the issue we had with the two court cases dates one being 2020 and of course 2022

[Stonemoney]

As long as HDC has no money & isn’t trading, they will keep delaying.

[king oil]

Intel is appealing the PTAB again. How is this possible?

[king oil]

Shareholders should sue Vennwest for f’ing up the possibility of an Intel settlement. They sat on this case for years. The judge should throw it out. Greedy bastards.

[LocWolf]

Results from 4/10/23 Court HDC/Vennwest........

The settlement conference reconvened. The Court addressed the parties

and asked that they inform the Court as to whether the settlement

conference should be continued or if the Court should inform the district

judge that the parties are ready to proceed to trial. The parties informed

the Court that the settlement conference should be continued. The

settlement conference will reconvene on April 25, 2023, at 10:00 AM.


Mr. Wedekind indicated that subject to the execution of a NDA, he will

share some of the information requested by the Plaintiffs.


The Court directed the parties to exchange documents/information, subject to the

NDA (if necessary), prior to the next mediation date.

[LocWolf]

Good_Stuff over on Yahoo might be thinking the dude over on Stocktwits referencing HDC thinks he knows the most recent document is from JA - Texas Court but look closely at the document expressed on stocktwits and note the documents numbers #54 and #55...The document number that comes after # 62 isn't hard to figure out is it?

[LocWolf]

I will check the other boards first then maybe download the new documents. I gather you are talking about Texas Court, anyways that document is most likely the minutes from prior 2/17/23

I see on stocktwits... talk about the transcript so I'm not even going to view that and besides I always record the legal events and video/pictures....but I will go and check Albrights calendar.

[king oil]

I don’t trust any of them. The HDC highway is full of roadkill. Apparently there is a new doc posted on court listener but I don’t have access to it.

[LocWolf]

OK...so maybe some type of agreement with Intel such as hey HDC you settle your legal disputes first then we will settle ours? If that is so one might figure that numbers were strongly tossed around? Why do I say this? Why would we not hear something from the Texas Court by now? Intel knows JA doesn't like BS and needless delays. It would seem to me why not proceed with both lawsuits as we have in the past in case Intel is stalling...call their bluff? but on the other hand I really have no clue, discussions here between us shareholders with remaining hope should entertain more discussions.

HDC, in closing at the 2/17/23 Motion hearing was fired up with getting with Intel to obtain pretrial elements to submit to Albright by way of his court clerks. That took place over 48 calendar days ago? Again, JA doesn't like unnecessary BS, & delays and Intel knows this so yes, a settlement deal must be on the table but how if at all can HDC try to control Intel or is Intel controlling HDC referencing "Laurie Vennwest" as George (so it seems) doesn't trust him nor to many others if at all from within HDC's past or since becoming CEO of HDC.

[LocWolf]

Cathy over on the Yahoo message board....Reference Judge Albright allowing the parties to pick a trial date. That is FALSE so someone tell her she is correct. What Judge Albright was talking a about is for the parties to get their questions ready for Jury Trial and that when they are ready let the court know and then we will proceed. In short you can't set a trial date in this type of case without the parties being ready but once it starts who knows?.

So once both parties contact the Texas Court Judge Albright will set things in motion, dates as "needed." and for pretrial hearing(s).

[LocWolf]

The Rule will become effective 60 days following publication of the amendments in the Federal Register. The Rule will have a general compliance date that is nine months after the effective date as well as a compliance date that is two years after the effective date regarding provisions to require an issuer’s financial information for the last two fiscal years to be current and publicly available.....or is June 28, 2023 THE ABSOLUTE DEADLINE?

9/28/21 compliance date starts? <<<<< This is when compliance date stated correct...and if so do we have until 9/28/23 to file the past SEC FILINGS?

Aside from that

07/22/22____ Zero shares traded as seen by us traders.
07/21/22____ 2 million share traded.
07/20/22____ 6 Million shares traded - Was that Citadel trying to unload?
10/19/22____ Jim Murphy resigns.
06/22/22____ Marty Delmonte resigns.

OK... it seems to me that the other that must resign as director would be the CEO's daughter Colleen. That would call for 3 directors to be replaced and hopefully satisfy the concerns within this area.

Comments anyone?

[Digdeeper17]

Not many warm fuzzies here ..
It would appear vennwest is getting what they asked for ...
But what is the timeframe ?
Cant be good as it clouds any finalization with Intel ..
Who is .. imo .. still stalling as they realize HDVY remains in a pickle ..
I believe 2 months left on this expert exchange ... And poof out o biz ....
Is how i read it .. ymmv
Which if others have followed the loans means a select few still control the patents (cuz they loaned $$ to HDVY for past several years {see filings} )
And shareholders get nothing ...
That would have to be worse case ..
And means if hdvy is to continue ..
financing using the approx 250 mill mill shares left in the 900 mill authorized and filings must be done pretty quickly here ..
Or settlement / buyout ...
Terms of which have to be getting worse every day ...

[LocWolf]

Good Sport...as you know but Sir John doesn't know that 1:20-CV-3386-LMM... Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta Divison.) is about and between Vennwest and HDC has nothing to do with Intel. In general to catch the gist of the case complaint it is about the 3 loans, timing of the loans, Series "D" shares, not having independent directors, shareholder meetings and of course HDC lack of other fiduciary duties. No doubt a mixture of several other items but this might help some who seem to think it is about Intel as it is NOT.

As for what Judge Linda T. Walker said at the 3/22/23 Settlement Conference about the director or adding them I doubt that is something mandatory it is a recommendation to try and start the parties on a level field, my opinion!

We all know there are many things are wrong within HDC and something sincerely needs to change as this isn't a private corporation.

Anyways the court document #19 filed on 11/30/20 is 28 pages describing the case complaint Vennwest has with HDC.

[LocWolf]

Look at that...stock price is on a run...........

[brodyyy]

I remain bullish, will be interesting to see what happens when this trades again.

[Zenos Arrow]

I appreciate your thoughts on Vennwest Loc

A 4-hour hearing is a long time. It sounds more like a strategy meeting, with breakout sessions and white boards.

Like ou7, I thought the board member exercise was a good sign. At least a sign that they’re committed to a company structure from which a plan can emerge.

Even if it’s punting their future and paying off shareholders, and not filing for Chapter 7 and dividing up the office equipment.

And maybe this results in trading again. But for those who want to trade 50 cents or a dollar for our shares, they must have a reason to believe HDC can grow the company to increase their newly gotten SP.

[LocWolf]

Digdeeper....at this point do you have any thoughts on Vennwest/HDC?

[ou71764]

I hope that the reason for Vennwest wanting the board members would be so they could have a say on the terms of a settlement/buyout. It seems bullish that they would want the seats.