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.
There is only one patent pending.
I posted the URL for the USPTO patent search and demonstrated that it only returns one active patent application. It is publication 20100248269.
I posted the URL for the European patent application and proved that it has been withdrawn.
WIPO shows only the US patent application cited above.
There are no other patents pending. If you disagree, what are the application numbers, publication numbers, or titles?
Furthermore -- a patent cannot be renewed. The one existing patent application is a new patent.
I asked "who dumped 10% of the O/S?" and your answer is "Christiansen got 224 million shares?"
That is a head scratcher.
What is "Here Say?"
I know you don't mean "hearsay" because what Goldseeker posted is definitely not hearsay. Thanks for clarifying this.
Also, I never said onko-sure was useless. Please show me where I said that, or retract that statement.
And please explain what you mean by "Don't you think Rosen would have added that to their Mayo list?" How would Rosen define a Class and Class Period if he included both the Mayo Clinic PR and the failed Radient/Provista merger? Those are two very different events.
Christiansen dumped 224 million shares?
Or are you saying he dumped 500 million shares?
Please clarify. Forgive me for not being able to decipher your post, but to me it looks like three unrelated topics pasted together.
Parkinsons and Alzheimers? None of your PR quoted here has anything to do with Radient. This has nothing to do with funding for GCDx, any more than Gartner's house sale was for GCDx funding.
You think Gartner got funding in October 2012? Then how do you explain the facts that:
* Gartner pitched GCDx in spring 2013 at AZBio. Why would he do that if he already had funding?
* Gartner tried to raise $10,000 on Fundable in 2013 and gave up when he only raised $200.
* GCDx does not answer emails and their voice mailbox is full.
* GCDx promised to start selling onko-sure on their website over a year ago but it never happened.
I will believe that GCDx got funding the day I see proof like an 8-K or if they start selling onko-sure on their website.
Ironbridge, by the way, doesn't own any RXPC shares -- check the Schedule 13's. They dumped a long time ago.
1. Debt conversion? What is the total outstanding debt now, then?
2. eWellness and Dignyte? That does not involve Radient in any way.
3. " It was Gartner who recently made the introductions between Dignyte and Dougie Mac-" why do you say that? Where is your evidence? that is a stretch, to put it mildly.
4. IF a takeover happens, not WHEN. Since there is no evidence of a takeover and no logical explanation why an entity would take over a shell in debt like Radient, That is a huge "IF" at best.
5. What has fallen into place? All I've seen is the dumping of a billion shares on the retail market. How does that fit into your scenario? Where did all those shares come from? Why did existing shareholders sell 20% of the company's stock on the open market? That does not sound like a creeping takeover to me.
Garza? SRL? Provista?
PR's and "analysis" done in 2011 and earlier are artifacts from the annals of history and make interesting reading. But Garza has not spoken of Radient since the delisting, SRL has not spoken of Radient sine they stopped selling onko-sure last year, and Provista stopped talking about Radient YEARS ago when they terminated the collaboration.
You can believe whatever you want to believe, but if you state something as FACT, back it up. Patents pending, for example. There is only one patent pending. If you know of other patents pending, provide some evidence. If they exist, that should be easy to do.
As for GCDx -- they don't answer emails and their voice mailbox is full. They are not selling anything. I see no evidence that they are doing anything other than paying $5.99 per month to keep a GoDaddy website online.
Maybe, after June 2014, they will try to sell onko-sure online. If they do, the FDA will shut them down just as they shut down the DNA testers, IMO.
Radient mentioned other patent applications in various PR's and filings in 2011 and before, but that does not mean they are active today.
I find evidence of only one patent application pending, in the US, and it is an RCE application. I find evidence that the European patent application is inactive. I post URLs and links of this evidence whenever asked.
Unless someone posts proof of additional patents pending -- application numbers, publication numbers, URL's, or some other hard evidence -- I caution against believing they exist.
I apologize, I made the mistake of taking your statements literally.
When you asked "then why did the plaintifs fight so hard to retain control of its usage?" you meant something else, apparently.
And when you queried "How can the plaintifs sue for CDN$20 million for a test that is supposedly worthless?", you meant, well, I still don't know, because AccuVector was suing for DAMAGES, and they can sue for damages whether Radient ever develops CIT or throws it in the dumpster.
CIT was not deemed worthless when AccuVector and the Univ of Alberta instigated the lawsuits -- does that clear it up for you?
CIT is worthless now, no matter what happened in 2002. Do you get that? Or do you think Radient is falsely claiming a zero value for CIT to hide assets from Rosen, as vester_guy appears to believe?
Does not matter whether the ownership of RXPC is different or not -- on June 3rd, 2014, the onko-sure patent expires and UNI can manufacture and sell onko-sure without paying Radient anything.
So can GCDx.
so can anyone.
"using Uni as an argument for how RXPC will lose the rights of Onko-Sure to them. "
That never was, and is not now, my argument.
My argument is this:
* IF UNI and Radient completed that agreement, UNI can manufacture and sell onko-sure while only paying Radient $100,000 per year - no additional royalties.
* IF you are correct, and the agreement was never completed, UNI cannot manufacture and sell onko-sure until Radient's patent expires.
* EITHER WAY, on June 3rd, 2014, when Radient's patent for onko-sure expires, UNI Pharma can manufacture and sell onko-sure in Asia without paying Radient anything. IF the agreement was completed, it terminates on that day.
The Univ of Alberta and AccuVector lawsuits?
I suggest you read the details about those lawsuits instead of just skimming the headlines. Univ of Alberta never wanted CIT back. They merely wanted a cut of the profits IF there ever were any profits. Accuvector never wanted CIT back either -- they were claiming $20M in DAMAGES.
AMDL/Radient was never in danger of losing CIT -- nobody else wanted it. The company was merely defending itself against DAMAGES and the loss of remotely possible future revenues.
Since CIT never got into the human clinical phase, the winner and loser of the Univ of Alberta lawsuit means nothing now -- CIT will never be developed now, IMO, simply because that is 14-year-old technology and Dr. Chang has continued working on newer technology at the Univ of Florida since that time.
That's why NuVax hired Dr. Chang, and after a month of research, changed the focus of NuVax to Chang's new immunotherapy technology and wrote off CIT as worthless. Do I need to post THAT link again? Fine, I'll go get it.
Please tell us what you think of the MJ rumor, Mr. vester_guy.
The new shareholders here would love to hear your opinion about whether this company is entering the MJ sector.
You think Radient is hiding an asset from Rosen?
You are saying "The write down was for a purpose I suppose... If the company had placed a value to CIT then Rosen law firm would not have settled for a measly 2.5 million."
That seems unethical on the part of Radient, if not illegal. You might want to be careful with public accusations like this. This MB is in the public domain.
Fine, the UNI agreement never happened. That means Radient will get zero $$$ from UNI.
Since this license agreement would have terminated on June 3rd, 2014 anyway, it matters little.
So Radient now has $100,000 less in their coffers than we previously thought. I guess that explains why they didn't pay the annual fee to keep the European patent application alive.
However, UNI certainly appears to be planning to sell onko-sure in Asia. Please read this:
http://www.pharmaboardroom.com/article/interview-terry-lin-general-manager-and-freia-wei-senior-consultant-uni-pharma
After June 3rd, 2014, UNI Pharma will be able to manufacture and sell DR-70 anywhere in the world, since it will no longer be protected by a patent at that time.
1. patents cannot be renewed. You are mistakenly referring to "maintenance of a patent" by paying fees. Are you not aware that when a drug patent expires, competitors can make generic drugs?
2. There is only one patent pending. I posted the patent application number and URL for the one existing patent pending. If there are ANY other patents pending, post URL's or post the patent application numbers. Not conjecture, but evidence, please.
3. I did post proof that the European application is terminated. The word they use is "Withdrawn." Nobody paid the annual fee in March 2013.
But, here it is again. using your mouse, left-click on the part that is underlined and blue.
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09789550
"STATUS: this Application is deemed to be withdrawn."
This takeover/rumor has been going on since March 2011. Every time the company's condition worsens -- delisting, lender lawsuits, loan defaults, cessation of SEC filings, company equity turning out to be non-existent, officers resigning, company losing its building -- the rumor morphs to become less logical and more obtuse.
Only time can expose this rumor to be a fraudulent claim. No point in tossing all this conjecture around.
If you believe that some entity is taking over Radient -- if you believe that this entity already owns over half of this company but for some reason has not returned the company to operational status -- if you believe that this entity owns 85% of the stock and all the volume since Feb 24 was the remaining 15% being tossed back and forth between flippers -- then by all means, buy all the RXPC you can.
Fascinating.
Instead of cherry-picking statements from SEC filings, why don't you post the link? Here I will do it for you:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/838879/000121390013003078/f8k061113_radientpharm.htm
UNI Pharma pays Radient only $100,000 per year for their license -- any sales in Asia result in no additional royalties to Radient. Furthermore, When the patent expires on June 3rd 2014, the agreement terminates, UNI manufactures and sells as much of the test as they want without paying Radient anything.
CIT is dead and GCDx never lived.
Radient says CIT is dead, why bother with conjecture to the contrary? Read the SEC filing.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/838879/000114420412037312/v316641_10k.htm
Due to the following conditions at December 31, 2010, we decided to impair the remaining balance of our CIT asset:
• Lack of any potential future revenue;
• Lack of future cash flows;
• High cost of future clinical studies; and
• Limited time remaining on the patent.
GCDx never got the license from Radient. Why waste time on conjecture to the contrary? Read the SEC filing.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/838879/000114420412054967/v325211_8ka.htm
As of October 1, 2012, GCDx has not made the required upfront payment of $280,000. Therefore the proposed GCDx licensing agreement was cancelled.
CIT is dead, says Radient in their SEC filings, and I think they have the final word.
I suggest you read the final 10-K:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/838879/000114420412037312/v316641_10k.htm
Due to the following conditions at December 31, 2010, we decided to impair the remaining balance of our CIT asset:
· Lack of any potential future revenue;
· Lack of future cash flows;
· High cost of future clinical studies; and
· Limited time remaining on the patent.
Regarding GCDx: Your information is outdated, from mid 2012. That license agreement was never paid for and was therefore terminated. I suggest you read this SEC filing:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/838879/000114420412054967/v325211_8ka.htm
"As of October 1, 2012, GCDx has not made the required upfront payment of $280,000. Therefore the proposed GCDx licensing agreement was cancelled."
The truth about the patent applications, with links:
1. go to this site.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html
Search for "fibrinogen" as Term 1 and "cancer" as Term 2, and specify "Title" for each.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=fibrinogen&FIELD1=TTL&co1=AND&TERM2=cancer&FIELD2=TTL&d=PG01
20100248269 is Radient's only patent application for DR-70.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=fibrinogen.TTL.&s2=cancer.TTL.&OS=TTL/fibrinogen+AND+TTL/cancer&RS=TTL/fibrinogen+AND+TTL/cancer
Now go to Public Pair site to see its status:
http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
and look for that publication number 20100248269, then look at the transaction history: rejected in 2012, resubmitted as an RCE in 2013.
Transaction History
Date Transaction Description
02-28-2013 Electronic Information Disclosure Statement
02-28-2013 Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Filed
02-27-2013 Mail Interview Summary - Applicant Initiated - Telephonic
02-20-2013 Interview Summary- Applicant Initiated
02-20-2013 Interview Summary - Applicant Initiated - Telephonic
02-20-2013 Date Forwarded to Examiner
02-15-2013 Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
02-20-2013 Disposal for a RCE / CPA / R129
02-15-2013 Request for Extension of Time - Granted
02-15-2013 Workflow - Request for RCE - Begin
08-21-2012 Electronic Review
08-18-2012 Email Notification
08-17-2012 Mail Final Rejection (PTOL - 326)
08-13-2012 Final Rejection
And now let's discuss the European patent application.
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09789550
"STATUS: this Application is deemed to be withdrawn." They didn't pay the annual fees due March 31 2013, a year ago.
Finally: patent applications in Japan in China? I see no evidence of that.
1. Patents cannot be renewed.
2. There is only 1 additional patent pending, the RCE application submitted February 2013.
3. the European patent application is terminated.
I hope those FACTS clear up your misunderstanding.
4. Japan and China? Provide proof. I do not believe these exist.
And CIT is worthless, according to the owners, this company, Radient. Read the 10-K for 4th Quarter 2011.
There is only one patent application now in the US and it is an RCE application submitted in February 2013. If you disagree -- if you think there are three as you say here -- what are the application numbers of the other two? Post a link to the USPTO Pair system for them, as we have posted for the 2013 RCE application several times.
And the European patent application you speak of here was terminated because nobody paid the annual fee to keep it active, as we have proved here several times. If you disagree, post a link to the active application.
Thanks in advance for backing up your statements here..
What "new news" would you have replace these stickies?
the first one could be replaced by "European patent application expires due to lack of fee payment. US patent application is an RCE and the existing patent expires on June 3rd, 2014."
The second should be replaced by "not a Yield sign any longer - Now it's a Stop Sign."
Or maybe "Class Action settled, Radient pays $2.5 million?"
When you say "when will they announce it," what is "it?" I am not aware of anything coming other than the patent expiration and the payment of the $2.5 million class action settlement that Radient is supposed to place in escrow within 15 business days of April 22, 2014.
I read your post about Andrea Howard-Small. You claim that she is covertly trying to reintroduce CIT somewhere. But you must have missed my request for evidence or a logical reason why you say that.
I'll ask again. Please provide your evidence. I don't think Dr. Howard-Small is doing anything with CIT. Especially since Radient wrote off CIT as being worthless in their final 10-K. Here is a direct quote from that 10-K:
"Due to the following conditions at December 31, 2010, we decided to impair the remaining balance of our CIT asset:
· Lack of any potential future revenue;
· Lack of future cash flows;
· High cost of future clinical studies; and
· Limited time remaining on the patent. "
EXAS and Radient are unrelated, IMO. EXAS' test is for CRC only. Radient let their FDA clearance expire for CRC monitoring.
That must mean Radient does not care about CRC testing any more. Perhaps they intend to focus on lung cancer testing.
Unless you think it means Radient is basically defunct as a company and has no money to pay for ANYTHING, including the annual fees to keep FDA clearance active and Eurpoean patent applications. That's my personal opinion, but impossible to prove or disprove. Sort of like a rumor about MJ or a backdoor merger.
Whether they resurrect the company or not, they must pay that settlement. Even if they file for bankruptcy, they must STILL pay that settlement.
Assuming they have the money or have insurance to pay it.
And Radient is not going to get licensing fees for DR-70 after June 3rd, 2014, because their patent expires on that day. So I am not suggesting that Radient is going to "try to ONLY get minimal licensing fees" -- I am suggesting that Radient is not going to do anything at all. No PR's, no leasign a building, no operating a company.
By the way -- you think $2.5 is "rather large?" Odd, I have been hearing from the other Longs that $2.5M is not large at all and a victory for Radient. You disagree?
OK you win. For now.
I acknowledge that this company may never file for bankruptcy. It may stagger on forever. But I have seen better companies file for bankruptcy, and i'm sure you have too.
I think there is one more chance for bankruptcy: if Radient does not put the $2.5M settlement into escrow within 15 business days after April 22nd, Rosen might force bankruptcy. Nobody knows whether insurance is covering the settlement or not.
If that settlement gets paid, then I admit, it is likely this company will NEVER file for bankruptcy. I also think it is likely that this company never releases another PR, files another financial statement with the SEC, or leases another building.
What do you win, may I ask?
If you bought this stock in 2009 I don't think you have anything to brag about, but, please explain to clear this up.
How many shares are available, in your opinion?
How many shares are not locked up in "strong hands," in your opinion?
I predicted BK in 2011 when you predicted a reverse merger and untold riches. The PPS was at $30 then, split adjusted.
You think your merger prediction was better than my BK prediction?
I'm not waiting on my prediction of BK. If there is ONE thing that's obvious here, it's that NOTHING is happening with this stock, good OR bad. It may stagger along at 0.0001 forever, with the occasional rumor to send it up to 0.0005. This is the bottom tier of the pinksheets.
If the PPS doesn't stabilize at 0.0001 next week, I don't care. It's all conjecture anyway. That's the fun of discussing a zombie stock -- nothing can be proved. But haven't you noticed that the huge volume is over, while the ASK remains a bottomless pit?
And that is my last post of the day! Enjoy!
Hype carries the most weight in penny biotech.
As I said -- I know you bought before the MJ rumor at 0.0001, weeks and months ago, and if you sold into this rumor, I tip my hat to you. That might be my entire point about penny biotechs -- they are fueled by hype and nothing else. FDA hype, Advisory Committee hype, Phase II Clinicals hype, rumor hype, whatever, but they fall back 95% of the time.
Buy when there's nothing going on, as you did, and hope for hype -- and when it comes, it's never wrong to take a profit in pennystocks.
But it's always wrong to come late to a pennystock party.
BP, I suspect that a month ago, you would never have believed you could sell at 0.0003 in March. Well, congratulations!
blackpantherz, if you sold at 0.0003 then I tip my hat to you.
odd, that nobody wonders why the ASK seems to be a bottomless pit under 0.0005. I guess not EVERYONE believes the rumors?
The proponents of the "creeping merger" rumor say that 90% of all shares are locked up in "strong hands" who are waiting for the big payoff when some other entity takes over. That's 4.5 billion shares locked up, and only 500 million available for retail trade. Think about it.
If you can't refute the message, attack the messenger.
Good luck with RXPC. Whether you make money or not doesn't affect me. I see that nobody can defend the "long" position, so there's no point in my posting more this week, is there?
Unless some of you want to explain why it's "logical" or "probable" that a zombie company like this would resurrect for any reason, MJ or otherwise, instead of starting a new company? This CEO has done it twice since RXPC died and he's Chairman of the Board on a 3rd company that's trying to backdoor-merge into a shell and get listed.... THAT would be a better choice for your MJ rumor.
I said it will return to 0.0001
And I've been predicting bankruptcy since 2009. The PPS fell from $30 to 0.0001 -- that's pretty close to BK, wouldn't you agree?
I still predict bankruptcy, but who knows, I guess this stock could stay listed on the bottom tier of the pinks forever.
Good luck then! If you are right, that's a nice trade.
Biotech is all about hype and not about the facts. We all know that.
I've seen the wireless and dotcom hype of 1999... the 911 hype for security stocks... the Bird Flu Hype.... the oil cleanup hype after the Gulf Oil spill (that one never amounted to much).... and now the MJ hype. I've learned two things: (1) they always fall back to earth, and (2) if you can guess what the next hype will be and buy those stocks early, you will make a lot of money selling to the greedy and the lazy who want to get rich quick without doing any DD.
Did I miss any? When the banks crashed in 2008, all penny biotechs shot up in 2008-2009. but that wasn't "hype" really. That was noobs saying "I've always wanted to get into retail stock trading, and I know I'm smarter than everyone else, but I've been afraid -- this looks like a good time to get in, and look at the gains on these penny biotechs!"
Let's see how exuberant you new "shareholders" feel next week.
Because I'll be here. Will you? If the PPS goes back to 0.0001 as I predict, will you hold for a year like the "shareholders" who got fooled in February 2013? Or will you take your loss and move on?
If someone was shorting this stock, they would encourage the MJ rumor and hope the PPS went to .0005 or higher before shorting.
Look at my posting history. I've been posting here for a long time. Now look at the chart. What do you see? Do you think I shorted this stock but did NOT cover at 0.0001 during that long dry spell between Feb 2013 and Feb 2014?
You make the mistake of thinking that everyone who posts on these message boards is trying to move the PPS up or down. I post here only as an intellectual diversion -- I like to try and engage the "longs" in debate.
Unfortunately, I am unsuccessful, because there isn't one "long" on this message board who can defend the merger rumor or the MJ rumor. Why do you think that is?
When the PPS was at 0.0001 and I posted evidence that the merger rumor is false and the company has no physical location -- how do you explain that? Was I trying for 0.00005?
Next week, when it's stuck at .0001 and I post something that proves I am not a believer of the MJ rumor -- how will you explain that?
NOT logical OR probable. If this CEO wanted to get into the MJ sector, he'd start a new company.
Seriously. This company has no bricks-and-mortar office or facility. They have a CEO, one other officer, and no other employees or staff. They don't have money or funding to get more money. The last time the debt was divulged, it was $15 million. The A/S of 5 billion is used up -- can't get more money there.
The CEO is a businessman, not a doctor. He would have to hire doctors and buy an existing MJ device or drug and try to develop it.
The only reason the MJ rumor worked, IMO, is because this company is dead and cannot and/or will not refute the rumor.