Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Dude! It's not like we have our 401ks invested in this stock.
Great! I will do that.
Looks like the stock is going back down.
Nice! finally some Justice thanks Generic
Still digging for some info. on that
Another interesting find in the 10k dated 7/31/04
ScanLine Technologies, Inc. (“ScanLine”) sued the Company in July 2002 for breach of an alleged asset purchase agreement in which ScanLine sold the so-called "Delta Assets" to the Company in exchange for Company’s stock. ScanLine had included claims against the Company, as well as individual directors, for breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, violation of 10b-5 of the federal securities law and violation of Utah securities law. A Third Party Complaint was later filed individually by David Scull (“Scull”), a principal in ScanLine, against the Company alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing for an alleged failure of the Company to compensate him for the time he acted as President and CEO of the Company. Scull had also filed a claim for defamation for allegedly defamatory statements made in the Company's public filings. Management had responded by denying the allegations, filing courterclaims against both ScanLine and Scull for damage to the Company, and defending the case.
Discovery had been ongoing in the matter, including the depositions of both ScanLine and Scull as well as the deposition of CompuSonics Video Corporation. Neither ScanLine, nor Scull could articulate a damage amount in the deposition. The potential loss was therefore difficult to ascertain. Scull had previously claimed a right to salary of approximately $225,000.00. Discovery cut-off was set for December 31, 2003 with a pre-trial conference set for January 9, 2004 at which time a trial date of August 7 was set.
Although the Company believes that Plaintiff’s claim was unfounded, the lawsuit was settled in early August 2004. CPVD paid $87,500 settlement fee to Plaintiff (Dave Scull). He received $90,000 as settlement, out of which amount, $2,500 was contributed by the Company’s attorney.
I believe they do why would they bother with filings and hire a attorney if they didn't have new plans go to pink sheets and check out the filings.
Yes old news !!!
Vismay Sheth, Oil Shiek
Interesting found this in the 10q for 2005
CPVD owns valid and expired patents in the U.S. and other number of countries. CPVD believes that its patents still represent an important and valuable
asset, even the expired patents, because the limitation period for patent infringement litigation is 6 years after the patent holder becomes aware of an
infringement. Due to insufficient resources CPVD has not been able to pursue potential infringements in an appropriate manner.During the last years the U.S.
jurisprudence acclaimed increasingly the value and justification of intellectual property. This development seems important for CPVD in its willingness to
protect the rights of the Company's shareholders.
Item 1 Business (Continued)
Consequently an increasing number of law firms are willing to cooperate on a contingency basis. CPVD believes that its video data compression is valuable,
possibly comparable with compression formats like JPEG. The management and Board of Directors is prepared to cooperate in 2005 with experienced
partners and law firms to enforce the rights of CPVD’s shareholders.CPVD considers the following owned and maintained patents important for the
shareholder value:
U.S. PATENT No. 4,472,743
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
U.S. PATENT No. 4,636,876
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
U.S. PATENT No. 4,682,248
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
CANADIAN PATENT No. 1,237,520
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
UK PATENT No. 0140957
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
JAPAN PATENT No. 2053230
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
GERMAN PATENT No. DE3486044
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
FRENCH PATENT No. 0140957
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
EUROPEAN PATENT No. EPO 140957A1
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
(originally designated to: AT BE CH DE FR GB LI LU NL SE )
U.S. PATENT No. 4,682,248
AUDIO AND VIDEO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
U.S. PATENT No. 4,755,889
AUDIO AND VIDEO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
CANADIAN PATENT No. 518,409
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
JAPAN PATENT No. 2596420
AUDIO AND VIDEO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
EUROPEAN PATENT No. EPO 237561A4
AUDIO DIGITAL RECORDING AND PLAYBACK SYSTEM
(originally designated to: AT BE CH DE FR GB LI LU NL SE )
I found this on another message board.
A te T/A 180,006,250 OutStanding.
I only found this which isn't much to go off of.
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/own-disp?action=getowner&CIK=0001285611
Exactly I am starting to piece this all together now. Looks like the company was orginally in Palo Alto CA. I am trying to figure out how it ended up in MI now.
I have been doing some digging and from the info. I have found looks like David Schwartz was the one who has developed all the patents for compusonics. From some of the info. that I have been reading looks like there may be a bit of truth to that phoney PR JMO.
Even the Local radio station announced the PR about the settlement.
http://www.wwj.com/CompuSonics-Announces-Patent-Settlemnt/5473931
Hey Wrinkles glad to see ya here
Thats why i am holding I still think news was leaked
News Regarding the settlement was in error
either does Pink Sheets I spoke with Brandon earlier
Thanks for the info.
I still hold mine as well.
Why would he tell me!! I am just some share holder especially if he didn't want the news out yet
Thank you!!!
I spoke with the CEO yesterday this company is right near my home. CEO stated that he would not comment on the PR he said that the PR was not authorized. Patents are valid look at the filings do your DD
Information is valid in the PR the company is stating they did not authorize the relesase of the news. It was never stated the information was not valid.
Patents are valid someone let the cat out of the bag to early
That's why I think there PR company screwed up I am going to call pink sheets
Exactly there is no way someone can jus release a PR without someone from the company giving there blessing I relesase PR's for the company I work for all the time I am thinking someone jumped the gun and now the company is back peddling could be that the PR company screwed up by releasing it to soon that can happen
It's fraud
Company is right near where i live
Maybe someone jumped the gun and the PR wasn't suppose to be released
Well someone put a pr out its out there
This is what I have.
MMTE share structure:
Outstanding Shares
1,498,691,168 as of Sep 4, 2009
Authorized Shares
1,500,000,000 as of Sep 4, 2009
Number of Share Holders of Record
1,516 as of Sep 4, 2009
Float
1,498,181,549 as of Sep 4, 2009
I shot a few emails out awhile back and heard nothing, like you said no reason for me to bail right now I am sticking around until the company puts out news about the new structure
Nice golden cross I love those
Yep me to saw the same filings. Also did you see the update on the S.S of NV update of officers
Nice to see you here.
It's obvious you haven't done your homework. Good luck to you
We will all make money today
We could use News now!