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.
Loch/CDEX insiders and stock promoters called this BS. Now, after over a year and a half, one can see it was the honest truth:
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=LOCHLONG&read=229633&submit=Go
Can't say that CDEX wasn't warned. So what was the response... ignore it and it will go away!
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=LOCHLONG&board=LOCHLONG&read=229488&...
Go to this link, then review the replies along the thread from Loch/CDEx insiders:
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=LOCHLONG&board=LOCHLONG&read=229318&...
I've learned that in a settlement agreement of this nature, Judge Schaffer does not allow access to the settlement transcripts without approval of both Parties. If both Parties approve the request, the requesting party must then petition the court for final approval.
Edit/delete
"If CDEX made it up why is ASD putting it out in a PR?"
Griffin stated "The court has mandadted that the terms and conditions under which the settlement agreement is entered into by the Parties shall be kept confidential by the Parties."
Crow is saying that if it was "mandated" by the court the judge would have been on record as ordering the agreement sealed. Such an order by the judge is no where to be found in the docket.
No where in the official statments made by the two CEO's in any of the PR's does it mention a court order. I think it is more accurate to say that it was part of the agreement between the Parties to keep the information confidential.
"Diddy Is that the best you can do?"
What High C, you don't like my laugh?
"No explanation, no hi tech BS, no fantastic predictions.
Just LOL"
Yes Sir.
Capnmike, LOL!
It appears as if Andrew Hartman's bio page has been edited once again. There are no longer any cases referenced.
What up with dat?
http://www.cooley.com/attorneys/bio.aspx?ID=34694003
"Even if he offers at a dime a pop, after awhile, nobody buys."
You mean not even Closer, Stan and the rest of the true blue Longs that keep claiming that they're adding to their postion?
"...borrowing at 33 % and selling PP shaes at a large discount.. quick ways to bye bye."
Why so? All they have to do is print up another 10 million shares.
Surely the faithful long shareholders would agree to that rather than the alternative.
Totally amazing Kidd. CDEX/Kidinsight/MP was even given a "heads-up" about ASD's patented technology over a year and a half ago.
All the insiders posting at the time blew it off as if it was no big deal just like they're trying to do now.
Amazing!!!
"...I told you that this tech was not CDEx's quite/quiet/quit a long time ago."
The orginal, revolutionary Loch/CDEX tech was about trace detection of explosives at great stand-off distances in near real time.
It was NOT about standard UVF detection of bulk chemicals at under an inch in pristine laboratory conditions.
It appears that the meth gun will be the closes Loch/CDEx is going to come to anything that even comes close to what was originally advertsied.
Sand, your talking to an Ontheedge prototype. Soon they will start volume production.
Isn't that a scary thought?
Yes it is and your starting the urban legend by stating:
"... and soon it becomes fact in the fevered brains of his followers."
You conspiracy theory consists of a group (or cabal) of bashers thinking as a whole. When one poster makes a comment or expresses an opinion in your mind it automatically becomes a consensus of the group.
We are individuals, we don't have telepathic powers. Have you forgotten, we wear tin foil hats? LOL
~out
Re the settlement, watch carefully how certain posters will start playing it down. Too funny!!!!! Do they really think all investors are that stupid?
Here's a couple examples, more to come GUARANTEED!!!
"Looks to me like we have them by the short hairs. Should they terminate the license, we can challenge the validity of their patent."
-dgei
"Sounds like they played to a draw... no blood let and no harm done. Co-existance rather than confrontation. Both companies save money, one saves face. Good deal!"
-topgrounch
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I see that WMFT's affection for me continues to show no bounds! LOL
They must have submitted the settlement agreement to the court today or were forced under SEC regulations to release a pre-settlement PR. Either way, don't matter much.
I'm guessing there are some angry PP investors that believed CDEX wholly owned their revolutionary technology judging from their apparent lack of interest in further investment, despite the the settlement.
This event begs the following questions:
1. If the meth gun is manufactured, will it require licensing.
2. Will this settlement effect the pending CDEX patent applications in any way?
Exactly Crow,
"...That did look suspicious, if one assumes that it was a open session.. Not to me, because I assumed that Griffin is smart enough to NOT have a open session."
No one said it was a bad, immoral or deceptive and as you stated, it was anticipated. Geez, some of these people act like they just got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
It was paid advertising with a limited amount of time. The questions all had a central theme and order: Here's what we have now, here's our anticipated revenue streams and here's what we need to achieve that.
Money.
Very , very low probability that random calls could have been selected with such choreographed flow and all of the callers happening to be insiders/plaintiffs/PPer's IMO.
It is what it is, paid advertising to raise funds. That's what they need to execute their business plan and survive.
Nothing to argue about. I think it was a magnificent performance and valuable information was learned or verified.
BTW Crow, thanks for the king words. I chose to ignore it, but as Rottenapple pointed out, I think Viking executed poor judgement in allowing those posts to remain. And like you say, he ain't to high on my giveadamn list! LOL
LMAO!!! You go girl!
Hmmmm... after reading the conference call transcript I have to make a correction to an earlier post I made.
I thought I had heard Griffin say that he would not discuss the sales price of Valimed, but I could not find that statement anywhere in the transcript. Apparently I got it wrong.
What Griffin did say was:
"... the company will not provide forward guidance
on future sales, earnings per share, production rates for products or product placing in the conference call."
Also, I am more convinced than ever that several portions of the cc involved prearranged Q&A's. I must say a masterful display of salesmanship. The underlying theme and purpose throughout the broadcast- we need money and someone better pony up soon.
I know you understand Paige, my main point was ASD may have built several protoypes which was the impression I got when I spoke with them many moons ago.
Crow, Closer remains a bag of hot air with his constant huffin' and puffin'. I guess it hasn't been a walk in the park for him this time- unlike during the Loch run when he sold the farm (so to speak).
Now he says this:
".......REAL TECHNOLOGY that is in MAJOR HOSPITALS, and CDEX's "related work", i.e. "meth gun"/patents don't hit bankruptcy, UNLESS the mob or insider's have some trick up their sleeve..............one more thing which I am sure of.................this "whole thing" is being watched by people that will do harm to those that get too cute. WATCH THE VOLUME!!!"
Apparently he has some experience dealing with these people and doesn't seem to trust them much. At least not anymore.
It appears as if he still has the inside scoop with major players and HE IS SURE that this WHOLE thing is being watched.
Geez, it doesn't sound like a penny stock I'd trust for a second. Way too many greedy insiders ready to feed on future bagholders.
Or... maybe he just does lots of traveling to such places. eom
Paige, the ASD invention was reduced to practice by at least one of the two methods, they disclosed all the embodiments in a US patent application. I say "at least" because I don't know if ASD also built functional prototypes of some or all embodiments of the invention to "actually" reduce the invention to practice.
Do you know whether they did or did not build a fuctional prototype? I bet they did (sorry Scared).
In either case, you're just spinning your wheels if you don't know for sure.
Reduction to Practice: The physical part of the inventive process that completes the process of invention.
Until there is a reduction of practice, there is no invention.
There are two kinds of reduction of practice:
Constructive reduction to practice occurs upon the filing of a U.S. patent application that adequately discloses the invention.
Constructive reduction to practice does not involve any physical construction.
Actual reduction to practice occurs when there is physical verification that the invention works for the intended purpose.
The reduction to practice must involve each and every element that is defined as constituting the invention.
The degree of physical verification required will depend on the nature and complexity of the invention.
"Just answer yes or No, would cdex have to pay asd for every valimed sold in the hospital?"
ASK CDEX.
Gosh, and I just made this post yesterday...
..."sooner or later the truth comes out and we look back at the way PR's and SEC filings were worded and learn the meaning wasn't what the stock promoters and insiders tried to lead readers to believe."
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/post_reply.asp?message_id=13598332
Yes Paige, we'll have to thank WMFT for posting the information before the error was caught and quickly removed.
Thank you WMFT even though you probably had no clue to what you were doing! LOL
We still don't know the terms of settlement, but if the agreement goes throught we do know that ASD owns the patent rights to the disputed claim(s) and CDEX must license those claim(s) from ASD in order to continue manufacturing Valimed in it's present embodiment, at least I think that's what it means! LOL
I think shareholders have a right to know the general outcome of the law suit.
Thanks again WMFT, way to be on your toes!
Yame doyourdd, that patent has NOTHING to do with the lawsuit.
In the future please keep out of these high level discussions.
Thank you.
Paige, do you think CDEX's attorneys are going after Xeno for saying ASD won the lawsuit? CDEX must be swimming in money. Remember, they're still incurring legal fees to wrap this thing up.
If what WMFT posted is accurate, it appears that CDEx has agreed to pay for continued use of the disputed claim.
I beleive that was the purpose of ASD's law suit.
CDEX said it was their own technology and they'd defend it rigorously, something to that effect.
So what happen? Who do you think won? ASD has protected their claim and CDEX has to license from ASD a technology they claimed to be theirs.
Thank you.
What am I missing Paige, I read last nights threads and there doesn't appear to be any deleted posts?
High C, what do you about WMFT's mysterious post about the ASD lawsuit?
I can't find the copy he pasted in the link he provided.
I'm wondering if they accidentally posted that information and removed it immediately after receiving a phone call. After all, wasn't the settlement suppose to be secret.
WMFT, where did you find this statement:
Analytical Spectral Devices, Inc. v. CDEX, Inc., U.S.D.C. Col. Case No. 06-CV-00426-REB-CBS (2006). Prosecution of patent infringement case involving prescription drug validation technology. Resolved by defendant licensing client’s technology.
http://www.cooley.com/attorneys/bio.aspx?ID=34694003
I don't see the last sentence (underlined) in the link you posted.
Well shiver me timbers.... Caller 5 is a RCL posterr, however as Crow has stated, I've found him to be a realistic poster that has not downplayed the ASD lawsuit nor engaged in promotional activities.
WMFT, don't believe me, but after reading Xenophon's post do you see how silly your posts are?
I think you should really consider taking Rottenapple's advise, the less you post the smarter you become.
Remember when you laughed at the law suit and I told you I don't understand how any reasonable shareholder could not take it seriously.
I suppose I should have said any "non-insider" shareholder.
Which posters downplayed the law suit? Let's see.... Raiderman, "a shot across the bow", Capnmike, Inet... those are three out of the five conference callers and I'd bet (sorry scared) GB (Caller 5) posts on these boards too.
This seems to be a very tightly controlled operation eh? LOL
Xeno, sooner or later the truth comes out and we look back at the way PR's and SEC filings were worded and learn the meaning wasn't what the stock promoters and insiders tried to lead readers to believe.
Remember when ATXMAN went to DCH after CDEX announced they accepted delivery of Valimed. We later found out that ATXMAN had been correct.
Purchase
Select
Accept delivery
Partner
Remember Nasfanium/Monsoonman not capable of saying they were dead wrong about "prototype". Too much ego.
ICCDP, why did you get booted off RB?
Something can be selected yet not purchased.
LOL! Keep trying if it makes you feel good.
Answer: Tomscheboy, Onthedge and whitemanfromtown.
Question: Which Loch Harris/CDEx insiders express opinions which are at the bottom of my "giveadamn list" (TM- Crow).
One more comment I'd like to make about the webcast. As I posted earlier, Griffin handled it well and the questions were good.
I liked when Griffin said that one of the objectives of the webcasts was to give CDEX more transparency in the investment community.
He then went on to say he wouldn't release information on the sales price of Valimed.
I didn't like that. The company's first and only product and the sales price is being kept a secret from shareholders? A penny stock company with a tainted past that wouldn't disclose to the public the sales price of their only product?
And he's targeting institutional investors?
Red flag... big red flag.