In my limited experience the contingency arrangement covered all costs including expert witness fees. The lawyers just deduct all of it from the settlement. That’s one of the reasons a law firm on contingency would rarely consider taking a case unless they were confident they could obtain a lucrative settlement. Often these specialized firms have a network of experts they can tap to be a witness depending on the type of testimony that’s needed.

Gobbledygook galore.

200B shares. Did you know that?

Sure. Over a decade ago. But they deregistered so it’s over for shareholders.

Sounds like a smart guy.

my recollection of events is:

a) HDVY applied for and obtained a patent for the tech.
b) INTC applied for and obtained a patent for essentially the same tech. This was a huge mistake by the patent office who obviously didn't perform their due diligence and awarded a duplicate patent.
c) A lengthy, expensive, arduous patent battle ensued. HDVY won. INTC lost since HDVY was first to obtain the patent and the INTC patent was determined to be a duplicate.
d) INTC's deception, trickery, and legal maneuvering kicked into high gear. INTC tried everything, from claiming that they don't use the tech to arguing that the tech can't be patented. Of course, these arguments are contradictory and defy logic. Why would INTC apply for a patent for something they claim can't be patented? Why would they apply for a patent for technology that they don't use? While their arguments might be legal, they are morally abhorrent. This type of behavior has very likely bankrupted many legit companies. HDVY shareholders are still waiting for justice.

Is that info as useless as the last one you posted? Then no.

It’s 14 years ago. It has nothing to do with anything today. Why don’t you just post a link to the constitution and say wow look at all the important people who signed it?

Wow. Over 14 years old. So relevant. LOL

That would be awesome. Fingers crossed.

It might still be under negotiation in which case there isn’t anything for HDC to announce at this time. It’s interesting that they haven’t filed for BK or delisting. That’s a positive sign for the time being.

It’s a violation of reg FD although the don’t know if companies on the expert market fall under those regulations or not.

Locwolf, it wasn't taken personally at all. I'm not sure why you thought it might be. We know that the tech works because Neogenomics and Vermillion created products using it and were very successful as a result. Somehow HDC always got the short end of the stick. Vermillion was probably the second most blatant example of that, after Intel. In hindsight I believe that Intel destroyed HDC's chances of success. I wish we could find out for sure why Quest never rolled out the biomarker test. Interestingly they recently did roll out a new prostate cancer test, I think in June. Quest was also planning to create a breast cancer test using HDC tech. Again, nothing came of it. why? did they give up? did it not work? or was the uncertainty created by Intel too much of a distraction and risk that they dropped it?

I blame HDC for not doing more with the patents by creating new products of their own. They did try a few times and failed. For example, that mobile app they created to identify skin cancer never went anywhere. And that silly attempt to create stock portfolios based on SVM caused more trouble than it was worth.

However, I think the much bigger lost opportunity was an inability to license the technology to much larger companies with huge revenues from existing products that already utilized SVM. I blame Intel for that lost opportunity. It is extremely likely that the ongoing legal battles with Intel prevented some or most companies from agreeing to a licensing deal. Neogenomics did agree to license the technology but they are probably the exception. Even with Neogenomics choosing to license the tech, many other companies may have decided to wait until the outcome of the legal battle with Intel was known. Also, if I recall correctly, Neogenomics and HDC treated the arrangement more as a partnership with a shared expert - was it Dr Albitar? - working on the product.

I also don’t know if we ever found out why the biomarker test with Quest never panned out as expected. Did the patent dispute put that test on ice? I can’t remember so I could be wrong. I just remember that we had a superior prostate cancer test but for some reason Quest never rolled it out.

Why would Intel have agreed to royalties in an escrow account? Hasn’t Intel been arguing that the technology can’t be patented? If they agreed to some kind of royalty deal they would have contradicted their own legal argument.

Barnhill was gone long ago. Not relevant anymore.

They ran out the clock on the patents as well as the CEO of the company. While legal, it’s despicable. Alas. That’s our wonderful court system.

The sell off seems extreme given what lies ahead in terms of revenues. Unless there’s something about the royalties that we don’t know about.

Wait for what?

They don’t mention remote dynamics. How much more obvious can it be that rmtd is not connected to Verizon in any way?

It the lawyers were working on contingency then they’d be covering the cost not HDVY.

It just doesn’t add up. Why would Intel spend a decade and do everything in its power to invalidate a patent for technology that it wasn’t using? Not only did they fight to invalidate the patent, they first tried to patent the technology themselves. It just doesn’t make sense.

Fraudulent

That’s nonsense

Too volatile for you. But hey everyone else go ahead and take the plunge. Lose everything. Not your problem. Hahahahaha

Giving back for what? You posted bearish over and over and said it was a typo. LOL. Ok

Or Freudian slip?

Sounds like you went beyond microdosing those mushrooms

But you admitted you’re not an investor. You’re just here because you had a freaky dream.

So you’re saying that march 2025 still isn’t enough time for something to happen? Lol

Maybe not

At least that rules out all of us.

Or maybe not

Unfortunately I can believe that is a real possibility. Sad but true.

The two parties are battling it out so they can pay lawyer’s fees?

Then why are they fighting so hard about the D shares? $2M would barely cover legal fees. It would be far easier for HDVY to file bankruptcy and end the lawsuit. But they’re fighting presumably because there is value somewhere.

New letter from Bill Quirk. He thinks the $2.25M is only a partial payment of the settlement and intended to get HDVY trading again. More to follow after that. Very interesting.

Unless of course they mark shorts as longs. By mistake. But that would never happen. Would it? Oh wait. It’s already happened millions of times.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-192

punters?

I agree Locwolf. It all started with the patent office making a mistake. It got worse over time with one incompetent management after the other.

I could be wrong but I believe that even if the lawyers said they wanted to continue the case because they believed they could win at trial, if the plaintiff says they’re done the case is over. The only thing left would be a class action lawsuit by shareholders but that’s unlikely IMO.