When someone first joins IHUB, how many messages are they limited to post per day, and how long until that limit is lifted?

All good questions Bill....and since you know their phone number, give them a call and then report back to us. Thanks

Wasn't it Larry himself that came on this site and spilled the beans about stretching out the case?....if someone can't grasp the simple concept of a nominal defendant, I would doubt he has any understanding of this case at all

Hey Jay, .. a quick question.... after someone has been awarded a patent, anyone that wants to use anything covered by that patent, would have to work out a licensing agreement with the patent holder. Many patent holders assign their patents to a company so all that licensing agreements would be handled through the company the patent was assigned to....my question is, why would Mr. Abadir assign his patent to TMMI if anything Smitty is reporting on this board were true?

Being that you want people to think you know something about this court case, could you answer a simple question? I see that HP was added as a nominal defendant....can you explain what is a nominal defendant, and what, if any, recourse does a nominal defendant have?

I don't really care enough to email or call....if this stock takes off I'm a happy man, if it doesn't...well...then money lost is money I won't miss because I invested so long ago and probably would have spent that money of bourbon and scotch anyway over the course of the last decade plus. I too don't believe anything they say....I believe mostly in what Jay says, but, my post was basically saying that I didn't think "they are too busy to respond to your emails" was not a good response. a lot of peeps loyal to TMMI are frustrated, just because someone questions the company does not mean they support the demented. Go TMMI!

None the less....if you have people on here stating...if you have questions call or email TMMI, and then someone says they emailed three times and hasn't received any response, people here shouldn't respond with...they don't have time to answer your questions....maybe if some of those questions were answered I would invest more...as of right now, my investment with TMMI was made over a decade ago, and I very happy with it right now, maybe if some questions were answered I would add to it

LOL " Defenses means they have been attacked and are responding."
Where did you get that nonsense from? did your $1000 an hour lawyers tell you that before they left? are are you just guessing again? either way that's pretty funny...good one smitty

actually the point is that the patent dimension filed with TMMI's prior art was stripped. Why are you comparing that to a whole different patent?

ummm...actually I didn't assume anything, it's fact, HP has been added to the case as a nominal defendant....with no responsibility, no fault, and no right to recovery,...so...what is it HP is going to do?

Being that HP has been included in this lawsuit because of a technical connection with the matter in dispute, and necessary for the court to decide all issues and make a proper judgment, but with no responsibility, no fault, and no right to recovery, can you explain what you think HP is going to do?...remember no responsibility, no Fault and no right to recovery.

Question for Larry.... actually an answer that Larry asked me...You asked " If I only give facts and my opinions would you still advise me not to post?" Absolutely!! in a recent post you stated, "there's a saying about opinions...everyone's got one"... so by your own admission, why would anyone care about your opinion?
There is no gain for you posting here.... are you trying to portray yourself as a victim by posting things like "why did TMMI sue me and the other defendants personally?" and "My name and my company's name have been dragged thru the dirt"?
I would tell you to grow a tuff skin because I don't want you posting on a TMMI message board to try and convince less than 60 people that you're a nice guy and a victim, and possibly giving any insight to the plaintiffs as to our mind set or strategy. Maybe you already did that by stating " one good thing about Nevada law, if this case goes 5 yrs (March 2018) it will be dismissed and they cannot come back and re-sue"?
By your posting "I will not discuss the question asked here about the merger",,, to me that sounds like... I plea the 5th...and we all know why someone pleas the 5th.
Two main things a defense attorney wants are...to know all the facts, good, bad, or indifferent Did you tell your 1st lead attorney that the merger doesn't matter? the judge won't even ask? He left right after she asked about it, and his answer seemed like he wasn't even prepared to be asked that question...and the second is to follow their advise 100%, 100% of the time. Is it coincidence your 2nd lead attorney left right around the time you started posting?
Even if you were paying me $1000 an hour as your friend Smitty says, I would walk away if you told me you were going to post. I'm sure that being the great attorney with all those titles Smitty was always crowing about they won't have trouble finding other cases.
You said "The court is going to decide and one side will lose everything" ...so no, I would not remain as your attorney if you told me you were going to post. Have you swayed anyone? Anyone now feeling sorry for you? From the posts I've been reading, I would say no. Posting on this board is a no win situation for you and it reeks of desperation.
Then again, this is all my opinion, and you know that saying about opinions...

Hey Jay, is that one of the many wins attributed to TMMI's dog bite attorney?

I wasn't questioning your constitutional right to post here, I was asking if you were doing so with or without your councilor's blessings. You are posting on a message board that is dedicated to discussion about the company that has named you as a defendant in an ongoing court case. There is nothing you can say here that will help you win the case, but you can post something that could cause you to lose the case. I believe that if I was representing you, I would advise you not to post while the trial was ongoing. My other question was why are you posting now? you've been a member here since 2008, what are you trying to accomplish now, while the trail is still ongoing?

Here's another question for you Larry, and as smitty pointed out, I'm probably one of the least qualified to ask, so i'll keep it simple...you've been a member since 2008, why are you posting now? is this under the advise of council or in spite of their advise?

Wow...it's so simple...case closed..tell the judge so we can all go home...or plea your case in court, not here on a public message board

and I already asked him a very simple question....did he file a merger. His profile says it was created in 2008, so he's been here reading posts. wouldn't you think that would be the first question he would be asked? before he invited people to ask him questions (if it really is him) that he would at least have a pat answer set, even if it was,...sorry I can't answer that because of the ongoing trail, but instead his next response was directed at Jay. why would he even post on a board that is created for discussion about the company that is suing him? that is just too bizarre

"ask Panik why he changed firms if indeed thats what they did"....so your saying he may or may not have decided to change firms....do you think he would have changed firms if his lawyers came up to him and said.....hey boss, good news....TMMI just brought HP into this trial....they just screwed themselves, there is no way we can lose this case now....lol

reread my post....where did I say HP wasn't coming into the case? I said TMMI was allowed to bring them in as a nominal defendant. My question was why did the $1000 an hour attornys run away right after HP was allowed to be added as a nominal defendant? even though you seem to think they are the Calvary coming in to save the day? the answer is....that at least $1000 an hour attorneys know what a nominal defendant is...even if you don't understand that

ah yes...the old HP fallback play....HP coming in to save the day for the defendants....makes me wonder even more why the $1000 an hour attorneys ran away right after TMMI was allowed to bring them into the case as nominal defendants....ur spin?

No I haven't....and that's too bad cause I had many more questions for "Larry"

and don't forget Jay....in "cases like these", when you are getting paid $1000 an hour, and stand to make a few 100 thousand dollars more in a case the other guys can't possibly win, lawyers often just walk away....lol... lord...I love this attempt of a spin

good point smitty....doesn't matter what's on your resume, what have you done for me lately...Tmmi's "dog bite" attorney has won every motion, and the defendants attorneys , what did you say... getting paid $1000 per hour? haven't won one motion...David vs Goliath? ok I'll take David....good luck to you

His profile says he's been a member since 2008, does that make him a newbie? plus the question I asked, I was looking for a simple answer...yes I did with ______state file #_____ or no I did not....didn't need a long dog and pony show explanation, just a simple yes or no...a quicker response than his response to Jay

Thanks for responding Larry....I will try to give you a call as my schedule dictates...Thanks for the invite as I do have several questions, but the first I will ask here since I'm sure everyone wants to know; we have heard so much about this merger, did you file a merger and if so where did you file it?

Hi Larry,
Welcome aboard...is your email address the info@...? or is there another one that you would prefer?

that's pretty cool that nobody cares about the merger and that it has nothing to do with the case. I guess if that were actually true then the Judge wouldn't have asked about it, and the defense attorney might have just said....no one cares about it and it doesn't matter, so why bother ask about it, instead of bumbling thru that now infamous "it could have happened" and then quit the case. oh...maybe it really does matter, guess we can just agree on disagreeing

maybe the defendants couldn't pay their attorney is this now a third guy? as soon as the defendants attorneys actually see the facts they run for the hills

yes something does smell, but it's the story of the court case. Lots of noise that TMMI is suing HP, not one acknowledgement that it is as a nominal defendant. That smells. ignorance or just to spin? either way it stinks. Even though HP is being sued (we won't mention HP was only added as a nominal defendant) they can decide if they want to participate or not. I didn't know that if you were getting sued you can decide to participate or not, that smells. HP can decide to tell the judge that they have no idea who owns the VDK 2.0 license, and the judge would just have to throw the case out. I would say that smells but I think it was meant as a joke right? Here's an idea, why don't they just do that and end this case? oh that's right...it's a joke. HP is going to sue TMMI and cause them to go BK...actually, that's stupid. HP is going to sue someone for using something that they might not even decide to look into to see if they think they might have a claim? that's funny...yep lot of things here smell.
Soon TMMI will be smelling that sweet smell of success. You can't stop it....cry loud cry long cry hard here we come

If HP reports back that they have "no Idea"who owns it, why would the judge likely declare TMMI's complaint void? Doesn't Tmmi say they own it because there was no merger filed? If HP says they don't know if they own it, likely the Judge would have to follow a paper trail, which ends with no merger being found? correct?

You need to explain this,.....in numerous posts you're saying Tmmi is suing HP then you post "If HP decides it cant or wont participate"....when does that happen? when does someone get sued and get to decide if they can't or won't participate? what does that even mean?

Actually he said there were dozens out there, yet he can't even name one...lol ,,,pesky little facts and truth getting in the way...so it's back to spin city

TRUPIX .....truprix is a reference to the defendants

is that more guessing on your part or the "sub50club" view of the trial? INHO I believe it was taken off calendar because they were close to a settlement, but the defendants tried to change something that the plaintiffs didn't agree to, so the plaintiffs said frack it let's just go to trial

Did I read that correctly? The Plaintiffs are demanding a jury trail? In a trail you say is unwinnable? now why do you think they would do that if a trail would be unwinnable?

refers to an order of the court to take a lawsuit, petition or motion off the list of pending cases or motions which are scheduled to be heard. A case or motion will be ordered off calendar if the lawyers agree (stipulate) to drop it, if the moving party's lawyer fails to appear, if a suit is settled pending final documentation, or any number of procedural reasons for the judge to determine the case should not proceed at that time. A suit or motion can be put back "on calendar" by stipulation of the lawyers or upon motion of either party.

no spin just what it means....could be taken off for several different reasons....let the spinning begin

"they can file a real patent application that could take 3 years or so to be approved or rejected." is this another guess? because according to Fracky, after demented had 80% of their patent tossed, they refilled the very next day and have a new patent.

Also if you can post any link to any on going trial where TMMI is a defendant and being sued please post it. I can't find TMMi listed as a defendant anywhere. and please don't tell us about Demented answer to TMMI's complaint against them. That was an answer to a complaint, other than answering "yes we are guilty"
their only option was a cut and paste response

"a possible company ending lawsuit " ...is that another guess like $1000 an hour lawyers? The only possible company ending as a result from this lawsuit would be Dementia, if TMMI wins. If they lose they still continue to pursue deals with Raytheon and such. This lawsuit deals with Dementia stealing from TMMI.

being that he posted info about a family court judge from California, and tried to pass it off as a judge that was involved in this case, he probably researched the wrong merger too

good one fracy now tell us again about the time you read about the merger