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.
My only question is whether that means mid May launch is delayed until possibly end of month? But that is a minor concern. Great to hear there are plans for Canada and Australia, at least exploratory. And perhaps best of all is the communication that shareholders get from the company. We’re not shrouded in secrecy, we have transparency. That gives me great confidence, among the many other things that do with TTCM. The future is very bright here. $TTCM
Exactly right. Dave certainly isn't perfect, but despite his well-documented faults and "warts" his willingness to fight may well be the only thing that ultimately would ever have put an end to the management circus. It's sad that shareholders will never realize the "full" value of the patents - what COULD have been. But, that "COULD" was never going to be allowed to happen with the crew that ran the show for all those years. The best realistic outcome we shareholders have is the path we are now on. I hope that it will yield a decent return, realizing it won't ever be "full" value. But the clown car that is (now) ex-management would certainly have yielded zero for the common shareholder. I'll play the odds with the receivership chance of something over the clown car's guarantee of nothing.
OUTSTANDING. Great to hear he is interested in hearing from the long suffering shareholders. We certainly have much to communicate to him. Thanks for your efforts, once again.
Good luck to all LONGS.
If nobody understands what this patent is then it is the receiver's duty to get the word out. We as shareholders can help impart that knowledge and urgency to the receiver. Akshay Sharma is a shareholder and pretty knowledgeable about what this patent means. It seems he has some vested interest in maximizing the value (unless he wants to buy it himself). Is Lance LaBauve still in the mix? I think there are certain individuals that the receiver should have on a very short list to contact and understand what is at stake. Then prepare some mateirals to market the info. Hell, put it on the company website for good measure.
BTW, thanks to Sirhaggus for all of your efforts on behalf of the rest of us - it is appreciated. Also to Eli for your skill in posting docs.
Must be this guy: Lionel Hutz
Is the next argument that those are just "resolutions" and not "minutes" so they don't count and the committees never existed? It's like kids that plug their ears, close their eyes and yell "lalalalala, I can't hear you!"
Not to mention that in the same email from the Cali case that ElisComing references in Post #53511, in which Turrini requests Walsh's resignation, his justification for the request is an explicit diatribe in which Turrini cites Walsh's failure to perform his duties as the Chair of the Audit Committee, including a thorough outline of the duties Walsh failed to perform as Chair of that very committee. The one that is established in the company bylaws.
But now their argument is that the committee never existed because they don't have the meeting minutes from when they established the committee? Or was it that the committee was dissolved when Pierce became an officer so there were only two independent directors left to serve on a committee that never existed?
So what's the next story going to be? Turrini's dog ate the meeting minutes, the company charter, the "correct" proxy ballots and all of their legal responses?
Or they could just buy the company and ensure that the patent never sees the light of day, if their current business model is much more lucrative. Eliminate any chance that they could ever be sued for patent infringement. Of course that would also give them the option to reconsider at a future date, should things change. Would seem to make a lot of sense to me, if they could control that for such a small price.
Agreed. It looks like the first case just went to the jury yesterday. Our case would not have made it.
Harris County Court website now lists the case as Settled - On the Record:
8/15/2011 09:00 AM 333
PJ File Date: 01/01/0001
PJ Status:
Trial Setting Trial on Merits Case Settled ON THE RECORD
********************************************************************
It also lists the next court date as Halloween (of all days) for the Motion to Dismiss:
10/31/2011 09:00 AM 333
PJ File Date: 01/01/0001
PJ Status:
Trial Coordinators Docket DISMISS FOR WANT OF PROSECU-MTN TO (TRCP 165A)
******************************************************************
Nothing new in the Images section yet.
Look at the bright side: this provides an extended window to accumulate cheaper shares. Take advantage while you can.
This happened to me too. You can call them and have them enter the order for you, that worked for me.
Thanks for the reply sirhaggus. Your thoughts on that sound reasonable but it's understood that you're guessing along with the rest of us. Clarification is appreciated.
To clarify sirhaggus:
Does Markle winning the motion mean that the judge has ruled that Daic's witnesses will not be allowed? Or is that unclear to you as well? I wasn't sure if you might be able to shed a little light on that for the rest of us. I figured that much would be publicly available information, not giving away any strategy or secrets. If you don't know either, then so be it.
Thank you for any information you can provide and for your efforts on the website.
Who is trading 200 and 321 shares in the .04 - .045 range? What is that all about?
That was me. Thank you for your reply. Hopefully you will be correct about these other cases (and more) dropping off the docket.
How many cases are currently ahead of Calypso on the docket? I thought at one point I had read that they were 5th? It would seem that they are well-situated to be called this time as long as nothing else happens to delay the case.
Do you have a link to the docket where we can see who/what's ahead of them? Thanks.
Spencer Markle is certainly not incompetent. Plenty of info available on him out there but I remember seeing this post a while back:
re: Westlaw Attorney Profiler query on Markle
I don't know why he has chosen to postpone again but I am certain he has a good reason. Maybe there are serious settlement talks? Maybe Markle is trying to show he was willing to bend over backwards to work something out before forcing the judge to rule on this motion? I am sure others can (and will) come up with more theories over the next month.
Yes, they did go in order. I think we were next up or second when the trial period ran out. If I recall correctly, we started about 30th or so last time? Hopefully that means we should be in good shape to make it to trial this time. Unless something else blows up, of course.
I agree. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see Markle withdrawing his motion without having a clear cut strategy moving forward. I don't see why he would give them a pass on this. I think there's a reason he withdrew it and the only thing that is making sense to me is that it is no longer necessary. Maybe there's another explanation but I don't see one that makes sense to me. I also agree with the thought that the latest trial date move is probably a coincidence. We'll soon find out.
State trial is now set for 8/15/11. What is going on here? Why has it moved back again?
It's the only thing that makes sense to me right now as to why Markle would back off. And I did say "reasonable" but there may be plenty of other "unreasonable" explanations. Seriously though, I'm not coming up with anything else, maybe I'm missing something here.
I don't see this as a Daic stall because Markle is the one that pulled out on the motion. Unless you're saying Daic convinced Markle to back off and discuss as a stall tactic. I guess that's possible, but why wouldn't Markle keep the pressure on? Getting this motion would only improve his negotiating power.
I'm not sure what you're referencing on December court date - that part is unclear to me. But I think given the recent motion filed, that would be the potential gamechanger where Daic may have realized it's over. If that is where things are, that only happened in the last couple of weeks so I don't think anything from December would factor in. Just my noodling things through, maybe there are other explanations.
If it is Markle that canceled the hearing, I can't fathom why he would do that unless it is favorable to CLYW's position. Why wouldn't he continue to make moves that improve CLYW's position in this case? In my mind there's only one reasonable explanation: this case is over.
If the two sides are simply talking about options at this point and Markle still has the ability to re-file, why would he take his foot off Daic's throat? Why not continue to press on and win this motion, solidifying CLYW's case? Is he afraid the judge would rule against him? I just don't see that.
If I'm missing something, I have an open mind and am willing to consider other opinions on this, but at the moment that is what makes sense to me.
I doubt even the court knows at this very moment. I expect that they'll handle things procedurally tomorrow, in their own order. It may go off, it may not. I don't think either side, CLYW or Daic, has any additional knowledge today.
Should these cases proceed to trial, how long would we reasonably expect them to last? A day, a week? Would the T-Mobile case be expected to take longer?
This is a little old but:
Pattin added that the lawsuit represents a turning point for Calypso, and the company anticipates the outcome will result in hundreds of millions of dollars in future licensing opportunities.
Hasn't the ownership situation been negated as far as holding up the T-Mobile case? If you read the filings and press releases, CLYW is in control of the case against T-Mobile, as the Daic parties have agreed (see below). Am I missing a subsequent filing, statement or something else that makes the below out of date or wrong?
CLYW in control v T-Mobile?
Calypso Wireless Inc.’s Update Regarding Patent Infringement Suit Against TMobile
USA, Inc.
HOUSTON, Tex., March 17, 2009 – Calypso Wireless, Inc. (CLYW.PK), a researcher, designer, marketer and licensor of Fixed Mobile Convergence (“FMC”) technology, today issued the following update regarding its pending patent infringement complaint (Case 2:08-cv-00441) against T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) the mobile communications operating subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE: DT) in The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division in Marshall, Texas. The case relates to the alleged infringement of U.S. Patent 6,680,923 (the ‘923 Patent).
“The ‘923 Patent is an important and valuable asset of Calypso,” stated Richard Pattin, president of Calypso “there were several agreements and prior legal orders that related to the ownership of the ‘923 Patent, and we determined it was in the best interests of all concerned to clarify that ownership structure, especially as we anticipate future license agreements, and, if necessary, additional infringement cases.”
Further to that goal, Williams Kherkher amended the pending T-Mobile case to include Drago Daic as a plaintiff. “We’ve added Drago Daic so there is no legal issue with standing to slow up the case” explained Armistead “Armi” Easterby, attorney-in-charge for Calypso. “We had already looked at this issue in great detail, and ultimately felt the best course of action was to simply add Mr. Daic as a party rather than engage in time-consuming motion practice with T-Mobile.” Easterby continued with “we believe this amendment will effectively neutralize any possibility of T-Mobile filing a motion to dismiss based on ownership of the ‘923 Patent.”
Mr. Daic’s attorney, Jimmy Williamson, P.C., was not added to the Complaint, and is in the process of assigning ownership in the ‘923 Patent back to Calypso. It is anticipated this will be completed within the next ten days, with the final agreements to be filed at the USPTO.
“Calypso’s management will continue to make the decisions on this case, and future licensing agreements and court cases stated Mr. Pattin, It also does not change Calypso’s fee agreement with Williams Kherkher.”
Mr. Easterby concluded with “we are happy to get the ownership issues clarified and behind us so we can focus on the merits of this case.”
One possibility could be that a deal has been struck and T-Mobile would like to minimize any potential negative PR resulting from having to pay out a chunk of cash. A good way to do that might be to release the news late on a day like Friday. Most people will be celebrating New Years Eve and paying less attention to market news. You see this sort of thing happen with bad news all the time. The one taking the potential PR hit strategically chooses when to put the word out and by the time most people start tuning back in, the bad news has been buried with newer stories. Some people end up missing it completely.
I'm new to posting but have been lurking for a while and reading posts. For the sake of disclosure, I am LONG on CLYW.
Volume is up significantly today which is good to see. What sort of volume spike would make you think something is about to be announced? I am interested to hear what others are thinking on that.