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.
That's a weird reply, doyourown ... "oh yes" ...
So let's make it just a hair more precise. You're saying there's a report that lists the companies that consider cdex competition by alpha listing, by country and by industry?
Each company that considers cdex competition is named in alphabetical order under a heading that reads something like "Companies Considering CDEX Competition" with codes or legends indicating each company's industry?
Why do I feel I just fell down the rabbit hole? Where's that room with the magic mushrooms? You've obviously been ODing on them.
I don't know what report you're referring to, doyourown ...
Does it list the companies that consider cdex competition? Alpha listing or by country or industry?
moonie ...
I posted this earlier today but you seem to have missed it. So here it is again, for you to reply to:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by: sanddollar
In reply to: A deleted message
Date:4/2/2006 1:33:46 PM
Post #of 10385
What "competing companies" are "searching" for footholds in this industry, moonie?
As a matter of fact, what companies consider cdex competition in any industry?
I've checked pretty thoroughly and I can't find cdex mentioned as competition by any company in any industry that cdex is looking to break into. All I can find is a suit against cdex for patent infringement.
Clearly, I'm not looking in the right places.
So how about giving a brief list -- the top three, say -- of companies that cdex is in competition with and poses a threat to in any induistry whatsoever? That way others can do some serious research on this weighty matter, too.
waiting, moonie ...
or does your silence mean you can't find and name any companies that consider cdex competition in any field whatsoever?
oh for pity sake, moonie ...
POST THE NAMES OF 3 COMAPNIES THAT CONSIDER CDEX COMPETITION IN ANY FIELD WHATSOEVER!
What "competing companies" are "searching" for footholds in this industry, moonie?
As a matter of fact, what companies consider cdex competition in any industry?
I've checked pretty thoroughly and I can't find cdex mentioned as competition by any company in any industry that cdex is looking to break into. All I can find is a suit against cdex for patent infringement.
Clearly, I'm not looking in the right places.
So how about giving a brief list -- the top three, say -- of companies that cdex is in competition with and poses a threat to in any induistry whatsoever? That way others can do some serious research on this weighty matter, too.
He seems to have taken the baton from capnwow ...
Not fun, I'm sure, but someone's gotta do it.
Relying on raiderman's dreams just isn't enough.
OT: there ya go AGAIN, moonie ...
carrying on a whole page of dialogue about things that have absolutely nothing to do with loch/cdex.
You're gonna wind up in gaol I bet unless you learn to add OT to your longwinded posts.
sorry, nojalo ... I just don't understand it.
Will you 'splain what he's saying, pls?
ot ... did you learn all that in aeromachine flying school?
(good to see you back, crow)
possible, lmorovan ...
but more likely cdex/baxa will "cease and desist" of their own accord, imo. And cdex will get a "renewed" focus on homeland security ... or vammp ... or one of their other remarkable technologies, maybe one no one's heard of yet.
paige ...
you've been as conscientious as anyone, trying to understand this.
It seems very complicated. Hardly the "walk in the park, it'll be thrown out" situation that raiderman and friends have said, in their infinite wisdom, that it is.
I'm aware in some depth of one patent-infringement case that took over a year to be resolved, at a huge cost to both parties. It was finally settled out of court.
unbelievable, raiderman's post ...
cdex for the Nobel prize for science!
Thought that gambit had already been tried with "Dr" Henry Blair ... but that was a long time ago so there's a whole new crop of peeps to work over.
Very very very very very very very OT:
WOW !!!
That was fascinating, moonie. Just riveting. What I was missing though was airspeed in your fully-equipped-for-over-water a/c, so time travelled between takeoff and touchdown (max 45 minutes, I think you said, or was that block to block?) could be calculated.
Now ... what does that have to do with cdex or its predecessor loch, the company tommy was so high on (along with "others")?
Nothing, you say?
Then why didn't you identify your post as OT?
I think that's a rule for this board.
Give my regards to tommy. Be sure to ask after his friend Nigel.
Why in the world are you asking me, moonie?
I didn't get the e-mail; you did.
edit: And as for making a federal case out of something ... that's what you're doing, isn't it? Why is that?
OT ...THERE YA GO AGAIN MOONIE !!!!!
Who said anything about good grammah being a requisite for posting here? Not I. I was simply commenting on your misteaks in the context of your being such an "erudite" and "educated" wordsmith.
As I've repeatedly said, you've just gotta quit twisting my posts (and putting words in my mouth). Just won't work.
So you've passed your flying test and are "qualified" for another year? Bravo! Can you legally fly over water yet? Remember, puddles don't count. Oh, and is 45 minutes all you're allowed to stay airborne? Or all your a/c (still love the shorthand) can manage, what with the price of fuel these days?
I'll look for your answers later tonight or tomorrow.
OT ... gosh, moonie ...
you can use bigg words like 'obfuscate' but can't even spell 'publicly' right! And don't know when to use an apostrophe, even! Or what verb form to use with 'you' (who has [sic] ...)!
btw, what's bprg got to do with loch/cdex? Plz to clarify.
Very funny!
There actually IS a patent attorney posting here, who posted well in advance of the current topic du jour, and doyourown is trying to find an ulterior motive!
Me, I think xenophon just trumped your king of spades with a three of clubs, doyourown. Doubt he even broke a sweat!
You may be right. I haven't read the charge in full yet and when I do probably won't be able to understand it anyway. If it's over patent(s) that are still under review, it doesn't seem to make much sense. Why would any company sue another one over a patent they've applied for but haven't (edit: been) granted? Maybe someone who really understands it will clarify what's going on.
rotten ... (edited)
Next question, does anyone think ASD's patent attorney/'s would have notified the patent examiner about any conflict there might be in the patent's we have under review? If so, and they find a conflict, how long before CDEX is notified and how long before CDEX has to make it public? Also, is there a way to find out if CDEX's patent's get denied without having to wait for the company to divulge it?
I doubt ASD's patent attorneys would notify the patent examiner. Instead, ASD notified cdex, by filing a suit (presumably with a previous notification by certified/registered letter to cdex). Now it's up to the courts, I'd guess, unless cdex and ASD agree to some sort of out of court settlement. If not, it'll be up to dajudge assigned to the case to make a judgement.
Someone can correct me on all that if I'm wrong. Only educated, fully qualified responders need post.
(edit) -- That is, why would ASD attorneys alert the patent examiner regarding any other patents besides what's in their suit? And as for any public announcements by cdex regarding this ... does mentioning it in a filing count as a public announcement? I'd imagine so, so no other public statement would be required. Furthermore, they're under no obligation to keep shareholders updated on the progress of the litigation until it's over; then I'd think they'd have to state the outcome somewhere (again, maybe it would be just in a filing). But of course, there are concerned shareholders who will make it their duty to attend all hearings and accurately report to these boards. Failing that, there are always publicly available (perhaps for a fee) court records of proceedings.
Thanks, diddy ... great analogy.
But can't help wondering what the guy with the hammer gets out of it, since as I remember, PP&M never had one!
That is, if Paul or Mary -- 'or' not 'and', just one of the them, to keep it simple -- were to decide to manufacture the hybrid sitting platform, it would require those hammering services (or maybe glueing services). And if Peter didn't notice at first, not til Paul/Mary started selling them ... that's when problems would begin I'd think. It might even be a problem for a few periphery but essential folk, like the hammer or glue guy as well as the furniture shop selling them, no? A ripple effect, sort of.
Imorovan ... the link, please? And does it include attachments?
Chuck Bagley!
There's a name from the past!
But you probably sell pookie short, rotten ... maybe she's an "intuitive" investor: reads smiles (and frowns) ... tea leaves ... consults her guru or swami twice weekly ... and "feels" that a turnout of six (count them, 6) at the SHM is a vote of extreme confidence from her fellow sufferers! She'd have started worrying if no one besides her had shown up. On the other hand, if that had happened, maybe she'd have read the principals' palms and REALLY gotten some insight.
Really odd about vammp, isn't it ... it was the reason many old-time "investors" got interested in loch in the first place (and lost it all when the big pumperdump happened). Remember how clozer hyped vammp all the way to the moon and back on every board he could find? Odd he just somehow couldn't make it to the SHM, huh, so he could ask them what's going on that they aren't talkin' about. Well no, not really odd ... he made his money the first go round and has grown mellow in his old age. And I don't think I saw capnwow's name in amongst the others who were there. Good grief, one would think he'd make a cameo appearance at least. Except he said he's quitting the boards so I suppose he's exhausted himself and won't be making appearances anywhere these days, cameo or extended, unless he's cordially invited to do so. Connect the dots!
Butt back on topic. Malc took over and lo and behold vammp got back-burnered. Where is it now? In the great circular file? Concentrating all their efforts on homeland security and screening drugs, they are?
Someone should write a book.
I bet you're right, paige ...
I bet they would like to get their name cleared of the lawsuit -- whatever you actually mean by that. I imagine you mean put it behind them with no damage to the company's heretofore stellar and unassailable reputation.
What you "get" when you start to swim with sharks is you either grow a great big dorsal or get eaten for dinner, chomp chomp.
How will cdex pay its legal fees in the litigation, paige ... did you ask the powers that be at the sh'holders meeting that? Or are they just assuming it'll be thrown out and so no need to budget anything for their costs? I didn't get the impression from other posters that cdex was taking this lightly, that they think it'll just go away.
As I posted earlier, I can't wait to see how this plays out.
BTW, are you suggesting that Mr. Liaw thinks ASD is a "shark"? Better be a little careful how you characterize a company about which you probably know very little.
Where'dja get that, moonie?
Did I say I was an expert? You do have a gift for putting words in other people's mouths. You really oughta quit doing that.
I'll wait, along with you and doyourown and everyone else, til the real experts argue this in court.
Since CO is so near your home base, I'm sure you'll hop over and be present at all the court dates. Butt watch out for those mountains on your flight plan. Make sure your aeromachine can clear them. And above all, point it to the right, not left towards SFO and that great body of water just past the bridge ... you wouldn't wanna make a misteak and fly illegally over water, however briefly, now wouldja? You could get your license revoked for that. That's assuming you have a license at all.
doyourown ...
who cares / what difference does it make who filed first? The key word would seem to be "patented".
Or are you a practicing patent attorney in your spare time and therefore so knowledgeable you speak The Word from the mountain top?
diddy ...
If Company A has a valid, preceding patent on one element (Element X) of a device (or perhaps one application of several combined and patented elements), can Company B come along and use either Company A's patented Element X or combine it with other elements (their own or off-the-shelf items) for another usage without infringing on Comapny A's patent?
It's my understanding patents are granted for novel ideas and things, and can be successfully challenged if the ideas or "things" are judged either not to be novel (original) to Company B or even if Company B uses someone else's novel and previously patented idea or "thing" in a different way, for a different purpose.
And damages can be demanded by Company A if they win. That's possibly why cdex refuses to put any numbers anyone can rely on to the price of a valimed device or give any figures for the valimed "sales" they've had so far, or ones they "anticipate."
In any case, really stupid for the troo b'lievers to say in their infinite (cough cough) wisdom that this will go nowhere, even that it'll be dismissed as frivolous. Patent law (like tax law) is complex and it could cost cdex a bundle in legal fees to fight this suit, assuming as I do that it's HIGHLY unlikely to be considered frivolous (and therefore dismissed). I'm sure substantial homework was done before the complaint was lodged.
As rotten said, it's laughable that peeps have "talked to lawyers" and think they now have a full understanding of it all. I rather doubt that a patent lawyer worth his salt would give a cursory read and "decide" what the outcome will be -- and nowhere have I seen anyone say he's talked to a patent lawyer. My sister's a lawyer but she has absolutely no working knowledge of patent law and would never even think of commenting on a patent infringement suit.
That would be like asking a pediatrician or GP to comment knowledgeably on a case brought against a brain or heart transplant surgeon.
Can't wait to see how this plays out.
OT -- This time, only you responded, pigs ...
but that's prolly 'cause I was responding to another poster and my response required no additional response at all from anyone.
That observed and said, why did you feel the need to respond to a post not addressed to you, unless you were the moderator of "that" board (the one in question on which the moderator admitted to a fit of pique after getting all kinds of flak from peeps who would like to see madama continue to be permiited to post)?
You're very transparent, pigs.
Looks as if ...
the moderator of "that" board has had a change of heart.
But will madama butterfly accept his renewed invitation to continue posting?
The suspense is just killing me.
oh wow ...
six (6) whole people attended the sharholders' meeting?
oh WOW !!!
They could have held it in the corner of a coffee shop!
... or booze, which you'd prefer (or brought along with you?) had you gone!
Why do you keep arguing with 4diddy, doyourown?
Do you really think you know more than he does about all this esoteric stuph?
You're right, moonie ... I'd run out of posts AND yours put me to sleep. This is my last post permitted by ihub today so I hope you feel flattered that I've directed it to you.
I see you're not above lying, moonie (not that I "and others" didn't already know that). Get the name of the institute right, or contact one Dr. Zovko of same if you can't. That whole exercise was just the "top of the eisberg" (tm Dr. Zovko) it was. And so it continues. Who hired malcbaby, moonie? And why? Riddle me that, for starters. And then splain why capnwow retired so abruptly. Seems Atxman and mike have some (chuckling?) friends in common.
One podunk institute? Not even a good try! You've simply got to put your virile vein-poppin' mind and body to it, shoulder to the wheel and all that. Use the same talents you displayed with your mooniemath.
I return the question, edgy ...
Where is the last place you would put breakthrough land mine detection technology that one is not sure of????????????
Hint below:
CROATIA! Specifically, the Rudjar Boskovic Institute!
DUH !!!!!!!
(Gotta do betternthat, edgy)
moonie ... you'll forgive me for not replying to your post last night but reading it put me to sleep.
Newly refreshed, here ya go. Before you read further please to recall I asked for your learned analysis of what's happened and is going to happen.
inpharma of course will be interested to write a follow up to this, it is an important event in the pharmaceutical world and is giving CDEX a lot of new publicity...
I beg to differ. The suit is hardly an "important" event in the pharma world. It is an event, nothing more. My guess is Inoharma may write a couple of balanced lines on it, not much more.
I agree with milchip and raiderman that this asid suit is a form of harrassment, a desperate attempt to stifle a better technology. I believe it is designed to intimidate and it could back fire on them.
harrassment ... desperate attempts ... you know all about those tactics, don't you. "Stifle a better technology"? Where is your proof that cdex has a "better technology"? Surely in your massive research into the situation you've found the proof. "Intimidate"? Is that why companies start patent infringement proceedings, just to "intimidate"? Gee, moonie, I thought there were other reasons. You know those "No Parking" signs ... that's what a patent is like. When it reads "Don't Even Think About Parking Here" that's comparable to a patent infringement suit. Someone posted -- was it raiderman? -- that this was like a shot across the bow. I'd like to suggest that the letter sent to cdex was the shot across the bow. It's moved past that now.
Especially if it is taken to the supreme court. Justice Roberts, of course would have to recuse himself, since it was his firm who represented cdex in obtaining the patents.
A coupla things here. First, with what money will cdex take this to the Supreme Court? That would only happen after cdex had lost and exhausted all appeals in lower courts. Perhaps you're picking up on my throwaway about it going that high. But you failed to note (in your learned analysis) that fighting suits and appealing judgments costs money. Lotsa money. Where will cdex find that money? Perhaps another set of private placements? Who insures cdex? Will they cover all costs, all the way up to the SC? Do you know something no one else does?
Second, mentioning Justice Roberts and his law firm in your learned analysis is absolutely hysterical. I don't know if he'd have to recuse himself or not. Even though his law firm represented cdex in obtaining the patents (is it plural now? I thought there was only one obtained), unless he worked directly on that effort, perhaps he wouldn't. But regardless, your bringing up Roberts isn't as brilliant a stroke of genius as you apparently think. More like a capnwow -- that's a noun, btw, to incorporate all the t'riffic research capndagood did -- as you try to put a halo onto cdex. You have heard of the halo effect, haven't you?
But I am sure the other justices would understand and be fair and unbiased, wink, wink, nod, nod....Remember that judge in Austin who lmorovan(s) says was an inonit? LOL.
Have no idea what your point is here, moonie. Perhaps you'd like to spell it out in this your learned analysis instead of giving a wink wink nod nod.
I think there will be momentous announcements in the near future regarding contracts and revenue and that this company has just scratched the surface....
And on just what do you base your "I think"? Just to remind you once again, this was to be your learned analysis of the situation, past and present, not your unsupported opinions. Put a little meat on the bones of your wink wink nod nod "analysis" there, moonie. (Like the metaphor? I thought you might.)
My veins are starting to pop out just thinking about all of the possibilities(tm pooroldnomore)
Maybe you'd better get some high blood pressure and cholesterol-lowering medicine, moonie. That should help what ails you.
there ya go again, moonie ...
creating a word out of your (cough cough) "virile" imagination to characterize what I wrote. I'm not obsessing any more than rotten was vowing.
But back on topic (which is where you should stay): how about that Inpharma bit? You think they might write something about this, after cdex makes its statement?
And do you agree with raiderman and milchip that this patent infringement action is nothing more than a tempest in a teapot? That it's simply evidence that cdex has something really really terrific (and unencumbered) to offer, end of story? What do you think Baxa will do now ... continue trying to market Valimed or stop until this "frivolous" (I think that's the word milchip was trying to use) action is resolved one way or the other?
Would love to read your learned analysis of what's happened and what's to come.
Inet ... just love your definition of a "material event" (at least you showed a little sense by putting imo in front of it):
"IMO it is only a material event if you want to give credit to it.
IMO CDEX and its attorneys have agreed to ignore it other than required legal moves."
By your first leap of "logic" then if the CEO of a company dies, it isn't a material event as long as "no one" gives "credit" to it. If no one gives "credit" to it, then according to this line of thinking, it never happened. I suppose a death certificate might make it difficult to "give no credit" to it (kinda like a public statement by Company A that they are suing Company B for patent infringement, plus having given Company B advance notice, makes it a tad difficult to "give no credit" to what's going on in sexy cexi-world).
Your second point contains no logic at all! You're saying that Company B and its attorneys have agreed to ignore the notice and press conference statement by Company A! What in the world gives you that impression? And is that how the law works? If you don't like what another party is doing or has done to you, you can just ignore it and it won't count, it never happened? If I get ticketed for speeding, can I just ignore the charge and it will go away? Carrying this from the sublime to the ridiculous, if I ignored 9/11, it never happened?
And what in the world are "required legal moves"?
Honeslty, inet ... you simply defy understanding.
moonie ... you mean InPharma has heard about it, too? Will be interesting to read what they have to say, won't it. If they write anything, it'll get worldwide exposure. Not bad. As they say, bad publicity is better than none.
Also ... you call rotten's posts "weasel-wording"? I don't think there are very many posters here -- I can think of only 2 others -- who are as straight in their posts as rotten. YOU added 'vow' to the sense of what he wrote. He was very clear to other peeps -- and he also said he would be watching. Little did he know what would happen so soon afterwards: capndagood's "retirement" from daboards plus a patent infringement action against cdex. Can you blame him for finding those sequential, almost simultaneous events interesting enough to come back to post?
You're really trying too hard, moonie. You're gonna make veins pop all through your body with all the effort you put into trying to discredit people and companies that don't suit you. But to each his own. Maybe you like the ruptured vein look.
(edited) Here's one by topgrouch going docdwight one step further: Not only is it all good, but bring 'em on!
It is not unusual for a company to claim infringement - you never know how the case would be decided and besides, you might just pick up a free settlement. I would hope CDEX would do the same, the more often the better.
Seems he's confusing being sued and doing the suing for patent infringement. Seems he thinks cdex is doing the suing and he hopes they do a lot of it!
And what's this "free settlement" idea? Would cdex demand that all their costs be paid? Or maybe they already have an insurance company lined up to pay them so not to worry. That must be it. And what about legal fees? Oh wait ... those'll be waived, no doubt.
Gosh, if cdex fights this hard enough ... maybe even claiming prior art, which would make both companies' patents invalid ... they can take this all the way to the Supreme Court!
What'll be most interesting is to see how Baxa reacts to this. Will they continue to market/place Valimed units as the next best thing to sliced bread? Or will they suddenly claim they just can't find interest out there? I really wouldn't think Baxa would want to be a party to any of this til it's all settled and cdex has been judged innocent of any wrongdoing.
And agreed ... why hasn't cdex issued a PR indicating what's happened? Maybe they're still composing it. When (and if) they do make a statement, will InPharma pick it up? If so, it'll be available for the world to read.
Also wonder if cdex will still hold its much anticipated shareholder meeting, or will it be cancelled or postponed for a more auspicious time.
So much to think about.
(edit)
This is even better!
By: shortbusters
15 Mar 2006, 09:01 AM EST
Msg. 26184 of 26184
Jump to msg. #
I think its great!!! Before everyone said it wouldn't work. Now we have lawsuits saying it does? YAHOO !!!
Validation by lawsuit ... a whole new world!
(edited) paige, m'dear ...
I am the poster elsewhere and formerly known as coquille. Any confusion now?
Hardly giddy, paige ... it's a development I never saw coming. Or at least not from a Colorado company. And just as the pump was getting started! Quelle dommage. btw, I got sidetracked on the way to the bank yesterday so never got my remortgage ... how lucky am I?
I didn't ask if cdex has a good patent law firm/attorney, paige ... I asked if you had any idea how much defending a patent infringement case costs. Two very different questions.
Obviously you don't. They can put a company out of bidness.
Think there will be a shareholders meeting now, paige? Or will it be "indefinitely postponed" for some reason or other?
(edit)
oh now I get it, doyourown ... you abd paige think nolajo is lmorovan?
That's the laugh of the week! Congratulations on your remarkable insight!
paige, m'dear ...
If you're thimking I'm nolajo, you couldn't be more wronger.
But while you're here, una pregunta para ti: have you ANY idea what it costs to defend a patent infringement suit?
Throwing logs in the road, indeed.
This is a major roadblock.
But not to worry ... cdex will morph into another name and come up with a new "invention" to touch your heart.
If they don't go out of bidness first.