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.
this is fascinating to watch, and read.
Be sure to report back what your friend finds at the corporate address.
And by all means, keep trying that phone number.
5 billion shares outstanding. You knew that, right?
Both parties agreed to a settlement. Here's the legal document:
http://securities.stanford.edu/filings-documents/1046/RPC00_01/20131217_r01x_11CV00406.pdf
FYI, it's a class action - a civil matter. Nobody goes to prison. And the company has not filed for bankruptcy.
I am not coming after you. I merely reported your post to the SEC. If you really received that email from "Eileen" at "Radiant Pharmaceuticals," you have nothing to worry about.
Nothing personal! Best of luck in all that you do!
give Eileen a break. She's new in the IR Department.
good luck, old Git.
Did you try emailing the CEO and/or calling their corporate phone number? Or, if you're in the LA area, stop by their "office location?"
IMO, the high-volume day on Feb. 24 happened because manipulators tried to run this up the flagpole and the lenders jumped in to dump the last of their debt-to-equity conversion. Result: high volume.
But the A/S is dried up now. There are no more shares for the lenders to convert. The same manipulators tried to run it up again today, but without the lenders jumping in, the rally sputtered.
Without the lenders jumping in to dump shares, I think the volume is going to die every time the traders try to run it up.
Today will be a good test.
Old, whether or not UNI keeps paying the license fee and/or pursues the patent matters little.
There's not much of a market for DR-70 and the horseradish ingredient is in short supply with no known substitute. It's very unlikely that anyone will make a generic DR-70 after the patent expires.
DR-70 is just another example of a device that got FDA clearance but failed on the market. There's more money to be made trading stocks of companies that don't have FDA clearance or approval yet, IMO.
Biotech is all about hype. This company has nothing left to hype, I think.
I don't know what their logic is for letting anything expire -- that is a good question for the CEO. Some here claim he answers emails. Others claim you can leave a phone message on the corporate phone number.
All I know is, the only existing patent expires on June 3 2014, and currently there is only one outstanding active patent application. It's in the USA. That application was initially submitted in 2009, received a final rejection on 08/13/2012, was resubmitted with a Request for Continued Examination on 02/15/2013, had the IDS filed on 02/28/2013, and nothing has happened since.
Part of the UNI agreement stated that UNI would pursue the patent applications. After that agreement was signed, the EPO patent became "withdrawn" because the renewal fee wasn't paid. Who was responsible for paying that fee? Another good question for the CEO.
CIT still has an active patent, by the way. That patent was issued in 2004, I believe.
The European patent application was withdrawn because Radient didn't pay the app renewal fee in 2013.
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09789550
Status: The application is deemed to be withdrawn.
Fees paid Renewal fee
30.09.2011 Renewal fee patent year 03
26.03.2012 Renewal fee patent year 04
Examination procedure 18.10.2011 Examination requested [2012/06]
18.05.2012 Amendment by applicant (claims and/or description)
10.09.2013 Despatch of a communication from the examining division (Time limit: M04)
01.10.2013 Application deemed to be withdrawn, date of legal effect [2014/10]
30.10.2013 Despatch of communication that the application is deemed to be withdrawn, reason: renewal fee not paid in time [2014/10]
This is the "WIPO application" that Radient mistakenly referred to in their filing. They should have listed the sexcond patent applicatino as EPO, not WIPO.
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09789550&tab=main
"The application has been published by WIPO in one of the EPO official languages on 07.10.2010 "
WIPO doesn't examine and grant patents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_application
"The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is operated by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and provides a centralised application process, but patents are not granted under the treaty. The PCT system enables an applicant to file a single patent application in a single language.[4] The application, called an international application, can, at a later date, lead to the grant of a patent in any of the states contracting to the PCT. WIPO, or more precisely the International Bureau of WIPO, performs many of the formalities of a patent application in a centralised manner, therefore avoiding the need to repeat the steps in all countries in which a patent may ultimately be granted."
There WERE two patent applications -- USPTO and European - but the European application expired. There is only one patent application now, in the US.
Enter publication number 20100248269 here to see the USPTO patent app and its transaction history:
http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
Here is the US patent app as it appears in WIPO:
http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=EP32734622&recNum=1&office=&queryString=ALLNAMES%3A%28small-howard%29&prevFilter=&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&maxRec=27
Eagerly awaiting your defense of these statements:
2. "GCDX/ William Gartner has recently expressed intent on using OnkoSure for his Lung Cancer Test." When and where did he recently express this intent?
4a. "RXPC has successfully fought off an attempt for the rights to CIT." When and where? I am not aware that any entity or person sttempted to acquire the rights to CIT.
4b. "The attempted reintroduction of CIT is covertly being handled by Dr. Andrea Small-Howard..." I don't think this is remotely true. Where is the evidence to support this claim?
Thanks in advance!
That's not two patents: it's the same patent application -- USPTO patents extend to the WTPO. Whatever happens to the USPTO patent happens to the WPTO patent.
The EPO (European Patent Office) is different, with its own examiners, but Radient's European patent application expired because someone (UNI?) forgot to pay the annual fee.
The USPTO patent application was rejected the first time through and is now RCE, Request for Continued Examination. There's a backlog of RCE applications.
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/14/the-rce-backlog-a-critical-patent-office-problem/id=35431/
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/rce_outreach.jsp
Looking good?
How is this stock "looking good?"
I don't see how it could look worse, frankly. The only possible news coming up is the Class Action, and that could go on for MONTHS if Radient doesn't put the money in escrow. Best case, Radient pays the bill, but I doubt that will move the PPS.
Next news is the patent expiring. I thought it was July 2014, Goldseeker says June 2014. At best, four months.
After that... the RCE patent application could take years.
But by all means, email the CEO and call that corporate phone number, and see if you can get a more positive outlook.
Covert reintroduction of CIT?
"The attempted reintroduction of CIT is covertly being handled by Dr. Andrea Small-Howard..."
This is a fascinating claim. If you could convince me that this is true, I would buy this stock.
What evidence leads you to make this statement?
Thanks in advance! Keep up the fine work!
BTW, it's not "Limited Information" any more. It's back to the "No Information" STOP sign.
What happens if Radient doesn't put the $2.5 million in escrow within 15 business days?
Answer: They go back to court.
http://securities.stanford.edu/filings-case.html?id=104660
C.1. Subject to the terms of this Stipulation, the sum of $2,500,000 (Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) shall be paid into the Escrow Account within fifteen (15) business days after the Court issues the Preliminary Approval Order. That payment shall constitute the Settlement Amount. The Settlement Amount shall be paid exclusively by the Radient Defendants.
L.3. If the Settlement Amount payable pursuant to paragraph C.1. of this Stipulation is not paid, then the Lead Plaintiffs, in their sole discretion, may elect, at any time prior to the Court's entering the Order and Final Judgment, (a) to terminate the Settlement by providing written notice to the Settling Parties; or (b) to enforce the terms of the Settlement and this Stipulation and seek a judgment effecting the terms herein.
A more likely explanation: Radient has no behind-the-scene machinations *TO* divulge.
I see no evidence that Radient has any intent of doing anything other than trying to find more entities to license DR-70 the way UNI licensed DR-70. If GCDx comes up with the money, I think Radient will license DR-70 to GCDx.
The only "current business" that we know about is the Class Action Settlement of $2.5 million. They appear in court April 22nd.
Radient agreed to the $2.5 million settlement. The only remaining question is: how will Radient pay that amount? They have 15 days after April 22nd to put the money in escrow. Where will that money come from?
1) eWellness has nothing to do with Radient.
2) "GCDX/ William Gartner has recently expressed intent on using OnkoSure..." Recently? When and where?
3) Agree 100%. But that is more UNI Current Business than Radient Current Business. Radient gets $100,000 annual license fee if the agreement is still active, or they get nothing if UNI terminated the agreement.
4a) "RXPC has successfully fought off an attempt for the rights to CIT, and retains this property." you mean the Univ of Alberta / AccuVector lawsuit? They didn't want the rights to CIT -- they wanted money IF Radient ever made money selling CIT. As for "retain the property," Radient wrote off CIT in the 2011 10-K as a total loss for these reasons, and I quote:
· Lack of any potential future revenue;
· Lack of future cash flows;
· High cost of future clinical studies; and
· Limited time remaining on the patent.
4b) "The attempted reintroduction of CIT is covertly being handled by Dr. Andrea Small-Howard." Please explain this statement and provide evidence. Why do you say this? I don't think this is even remotely correct.
Buying a new suit for a Date with the Judge on April 22nd.
Can't argue with that, Mr. Peggy.
That's another good topic to cover in your email correspondence with the CEO. What are Christiansen's job duties?
Here are others. What is Radient's current debt? Did they ever pay that $966,000 they owed in December 2011 for unpaid operational bills? Did they ever pay MVSS?
What's the O/S now? Who owns the stock -- how much does the CEO own? Why are there no Schedule 13's filed?
How is Radient paying the CA settlement -- is it covered by insurance?
Where is the office located? Where is the manufacturing facility located? Is the manufacturing facility approved by the FDA?
Who let the European patent application lapse, and why?
What is the status of GCDx? Why aren't they selling the lung cancer test yet?
And here's a softball for a CEO: Why should investors buy this stock?
I'll hang up and listen.
Those are good questions for Radient's CEO. You have communicated with him via email, you said. Please ask him these questions, and let us know what he says in response.
I don't know of any "current business" or "future direction" for Radient. I do know that their only remaining patent for DR-70 / onko-sure expires in July 2014.
I also know that their voice mailboxes at the corporate phone number you supplied are all full.
I appreciate your diligence in researching this company, dcspka. I admire your tenacity! Please let us know ASAP if you find any evidence of any kind that this company has future direction and/or current business.
Radient was open for real business from 1996 through December 2011, and maybe even a few months into 2012.
I never email or call a CEO. That's not DD. CEO's spin everything -- that is their main job. And CEO's can't tell you anything that is not already public.
Another bad source for information: vendors and salespeople.
I read SEC filings for my information. SEC filings are not open to interpretation. And I read journal publications. Science is science, and the facts are the facts.
I do not see any evidence that RXPC is open for business. I would like to see some evidence. I don't want to see RXPC fail and I don't want to see people lose money. I have nothing against this company or its officers. But I think that Radient's and GCDx's full voice mailboxes mean that nobody is listening to those messages.
Option 3 was full last week, and it is full now, but you got through? That's good news! When you get the return call, be sure to tell us about the conversation. Thanks!
Who is willing to come to the financial rescue of Radient? How do you know this? Please be specific.
It will happen soon? how soon? I've been hearing "it will happen soon" since the takeover rumor started in March 2011. That's three years of "it will happen soon."
How did you leave a message at that number?
The voice mailbox is full under options 1-3 and option 4 just disconnects.
the insurance was in force in 2011 when the lawsuit started so it might still cover the claim. We won't know uintil after April 22nd.
Radient is not doing anything and not making any money, other than $100,000 per year annual license fee from UNI.
At what phone number did you leave a message? Where did you find an active phone for Radient? At their corporate number, you cannot leave a message because all their voice mailboxes are full. So how did you leave a message?
Radient has not paid anything yet. No money is in escrow.
The settlement COURT date is April 22nd. After that date, Radient has something like 14 days to put the money into escrow. If there is no insurance to cover the settlement, and Radient does not place the money in escrow in that alloted time requirement, what will Rosen do? What CAN Rosen do? There is no blood in a turnip.
I called. There are 4 options. I called four times to try each option.
option 1, Domestic Sales and Inquiries: "I'm sorry, this mailbox is full."
option 2, International Sales and Inquiries: "I'm sorry, this mailbox is full."
option 3, Investor Relations: "I'm sorry, this mailbox is full."
option 4, All Other Departments: it disconnects. There is no mailbox.
GCDx has the same problem. Nobody answers their phone and the mailboxes are full.
Full mailboxes means that nobody even LISTENS to the messages.
Which post number are you referring to -- where did Goldseeker say that Radient's phone was disconnected?
I see where he says that Paul Knopick's Radient IR phone is disconnected. That was a different number. Radient used to outsource IR to Paul Knopick but that ended quite some time ago.
I think you should ask the dentist's receptionist whether Radient is still in that office.
Want to explain that, or should I?
I will call and try to leave a message.
If Radient answers that phone number, I have many questions. How much is their current debt? Where is their office? How many employees? When will they resume filing SEC financials? Who is paying the CA settlement - insurance, or Radient? And how's that backdoor merger coming? (chuckle)
I don't know if Radient's phone was ever disconnected. I do know that GCDx also has a telephone number, but when I tried calling, nobody ever answered and their voice mailbox was full so you couldn't leave a message. That was last summer. Time flies.
Call how many times though Jim? 100?
Nobody is going to answer that phone.
The reason this stock i9asn't going anywhere is NOT the class action.
This stock isn't going anywhere because:
1. the company hasn't filed financials since 4th Qtr 2011.
2. The company no longer has a manufacturing facility or a physical office.
3. All employees except the CEO and one other officer are gone. There is nobody to answer the phone, no IR, nobody manufacturing anything.
4. the A/S of 5 billion appears to be completely issued now. We don't really know, because the T/A stopped divulging the O/S several months ago when it was 4.5 billion.
5. The company has one product, a test called DR-70, and the patent expires in July 2014. A new patent application was submitted in 2009 but it was rejected by the Patent Office -- the patent app is now an RCE re-submitted in 2013.
6. The only place DR-70 had even modest revenue success was in Asia. Radient has now licensed DR-70 to UNI for $100,000 per year, and that license includes all intellectual property.
7. The last time the debt was divulged (end of 2012), it was $14 million, and ALL loans were in default. At that time, the company also reported $900,000 in operational bills they were unable to pay.
Those are the facts.
Now for some conjecture: #5 is important because the Patent Office has been delaying RCE's for years -- DD RCE and Patent Office.
#6 is important because there are no other revenues coming in for Radient -- just that $100,000 license fee per year.
#7 is important because Radient has no way to keep up with the default and penalty interest on those loans, let alone repay the principal.
Any counter-arguments are welcome. Conjecture about a takeover is not welcome. No entity will take over, buy, or merge with a toxic company like Radient.
I'm not moving on or forgetting about this stock.
This is a public forum. I am here to talk about Radient, not try to convince anyone to buy or sell the stock.
No one around on a Sunday?
Nobody is going to answer that phone, ever. But you can keep calling if you want.
Radient doesn't have a physical office, in Tustin or anywhere else.