"The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing; if you can fake that, you’ve got it made."-GROUCHO MARX
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.
Disaster response, particularly those involving one or a combination of contaminant, evacuation, or mass-casualty. When the expeditionary C2 networks come on line and band-width is prioritized and dedicated to decontamination, triage, and evacuation, having access to a PHR will mitigate huge patient screening bottlenecks at casualty collection points and medical treatment at displaced personnel centers. Right now it is critical because what you say regarding provider EHRs already having them is only half-truth.
EMR/EHR interoperability between multitude of stove-piped systems is no where near where it was supposed to be. The PHR, however, is plug-and play in all. If the hospital system the patient has their data on their EHR is within the effected zone, and recognizing there was a good chance they wouldn't have been able to share the patients info with another EHR anyway, a PHR plugs the hole.
I'd hate to see it tank. The nation needs PHRs (people just don't know it yet). MMR has always been the one to do it and has the most extensive patent base to support that. Sad though. Such potential, consistently damaging its own credibility and investor trust along with it. GLTA.
Yesterday, Day of Truth finally arrived. Today is the day of reckoning of that truth. Wonder if there will be heightened painting activity? Wonder if PPS will hold? and will that be because diluter MMs back-off in light of the "truth" that came out yesterday? Will their be a deflecting PR similar to pas BL behaviors? Interesting day I expect.
But hey, for every huge sell someone is buying right? GLT those people.
DAY OF TRUTH HAS ARRIVED!! 10q coming out today.
Key to this mornings PR if we want to get a real idea of what to expect in 10Q truth ($$$), is the omission of IP licensing revenue as part of the "record" revenue. Not just licensing of PHR products. PRs of record point exactly to the supposed great deal with WAG, not so anymore?. I am SOOOOO looking forward to seeing the 10q and the agreement with WAG as promised, though redacted. Truth confirmed shortly.
Truth in fact is nearly upon us ---> 15 May 10Q
Our next installment of truth. Looking forward to it.
Great indication of how good or bad 10Q will be can easily be based on how many and how grand of a PR campaign is put out this and next week. I know this is a statement of the obvious to anyone that has been in MMRF a while, but its all the DD I need based on trends as we wait on the REAL truth (10q).
SCM case update. Doc posted, filed by BL (individual cross-defendant; reminder 27 Mar SCM filed cross complaint against BL-individual - as part of case between MMR and SCM).
Represented not by Liner/Ward, but White & Case LLP, Bryan Merryman, Rachel Feldman, and Bridget Freeman.
The filing is a Notice of hearing; Demurrer to cross-complaint; and Memo of points and authorities. Im curious when we will see MMR's answer to SCM's cross-complaint (they put cross complaints in for both BL and MMR).
Notice of hearing on BL's Demurrer is for May 6th.
Demurrer-
The provider/doctor looked. At my authorization form requesting a fax direct to my PHR (they are required to send me a copy, even prove they can do so with MU wall closing in). My provider/doctor had to work to make sure it was sent. Work they HAD to do. Two ends of this transaction-transmission of record. One of which is just now getting it's act together in accordance with requirements (Providers transmitting records to patients PHRs) Later then forecasted. Patient interest in having their providers do what they are required to do will soon grow. I would agree with you if both ends of the transmission did not care about PHRs, which unfortunately has been the case with providers struggling to get their own paperless house (EHR/EMR) in order and a still present distrust of their patients being able to handle that responsibility (PHR up to date and accurate).
I just logged in today. I took my kids for annual pediatric visit Friday. As promised by their pediatrician's staff, they used my direct-PHR fax number to send me copies, and there they were waiting for me in my MMR PHR first thing today. It works great
Sell or not sell. Cant please some people. "MMR not spending resources on selling, only on litigation." Today's PR says they are spending resources on selling. Yet people are still not happy with that. I would also like to know WHO are the retailers and etailers by name though. Those obviously are already known in the PR, so what is stopping MMR from announcing who they are?
Forcing shareholders to dig again for what should be obvious they want (in order to know they are not being BS'd).
"what is going on with our stock"?
Yeah, how bout that?
"[paraphrased answer] Huge amounts of shares selling after deal announcements by people who are short-sighted"
Wrong answer
We (you too) know exactly who those sellers / warrant-issue holders are.
Setting up the perfect storm that robbed the longs of their long awaited news of MMR settling with the biggest and fattest($$$) defendant; the largest pharmacy chain in the world; by having those warrants/issues vest prior to the big deal announcement. Another thing that BL owns.
Thanks for the L2 Check. It confirms real motive behind PR (share selling). This long doesn't need (and is tired of) being told these PRs are shareholder updates when they are not.
(Blue in face argument to BL to no avail): Update ONLY when there is indeed deal(s) finalized. And not a BS deal is "confidential" announcement after either. Especially when there was no problem pumping the deals/pending agreements/settlements on the front end before finalized.
MMR wants to be credible?; to have its value increase? BL wants to be known as a big-time savvy business man instead of a marketeering used car salesman?
Then PERFORM up to the fluff in PRs or DONT fluff PR at all.
SHOW US THE MONEY!!!!!!!!
Excited about the "RECORD breaking" 10Q coming out shortly.
Go MMRF!
Those "preparing" to be millionaires based on another forward looking PR are the ones buying.
Question is, will the "record" 10q that will be released shortly tell them after buying that they need preparation-H?
Looks like dilution or whatever has stopped, and MMs are letting it run a bit. Can anyone with L2 verify that MAXM is laying off?
Great news (again). However, today and the PPS will be based upon focus on the "preparing" though, linked directly to context of those type words in past PRs and factual results.
Ill wait on the 10Q to get the facts.
Its a Cerner Rep who handles implementation of Cerner CommunityWorks systems into hospital systems. I would hope he/she is reliable. lol.
Though irritating as all hades I had to go to Cerner to find out what BL should have told us.
We have the answer to your point two from a Cerner rep. This is the response an unnamed hospital system rep gave me, forwarded from their Cerner Engagement Leader - CommunityWorks after I asked them if MMR was part of their Cerner EHR implementation:
Within days of that is the SCM / MMR status conference: 05/02/2014 at 08:30 am in department 17 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?
Still nothing new on Pacer for the remaining IP cases (WebMD, Quest, Jardogs/Allscripts).
This creation / acquisition of Expression Systems on Mar 28,2012 (appeared on yesterdays 10K) also was not on the applicable 10q ending March 2012, or any 8K.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285701/000113626112000300/form10q.htm
Is it this company that was already established, and did business with Favrile?
http://www.expressionsystems.com/?mvcTask=aboutUs
To omit this subsidiary (acquisition?) until now is pretty significant, particularly since there was already a company of that name doing business with Favrille.
Was this Royston's doing?
From today's 2013 10K:
I certainly don't think its an arbitrary date (4-14-2014) for waiver/extension. If conditions of this atrocious 10k were to continue, there wont be any assets/cash available to pay any penalty for having cash below 200K. Therefore, I think it is tied into this:
Bob posted his Hanna&Barbara Earthquake Response books on FB corresponding to the LA Earthquake yesterday.
This weekend at the Southern Women's Show in Nashville..
Background: Healthspek is Walgreen's PHR.
I have not seen any of the defendant's documents relating to this deadline, at least not posted on PACER. If anyone has them, please share.
MAR 27, 2014: Deadline for Defendants to serve Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R.3-3) and accompanying document production (Patent L.R. 3-4)
Looking back, I am not seeing any of the docs from MMR relating to the earlier deadline either:
FEB 10, 2014: Deadline for Plaintiff to serve Disclosure of Asserted Claims and Infringement Contentions (Patent L.R. 3-1) and accompanying document production (Patent L.R. 3-2)
I presumed the court had oversight of these deadlines and required parties to file them (e.g. they would ultimately show up on PACER). I could be wrong. I will dig into it a bit more.
Source: MARKMAN SCHEDULING ORDER FOR CONSOLIDATED CLAIM CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDINGS, filed 1-14-2014
SCM just filed FIVE documents:
1- DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT SURGERY CENTER MANAGEMENT, LLC'S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
2- SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT AND CROSS-CLAIMANT SURGERY CENTER MANAGEMENT, LLC?S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
3- DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT SURGERY CENTER MANAGEMENT, LLC'S APPENDIX OF NON-CALIFORNIA AUTHORITY CITED IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
4- DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT SURGERY CENTER MANAGEMENT, LLC'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
5- DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT SURGERY CENTER MANAGEMENT, LLC'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case BC477254 - http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?
5000 share paint-up. Rigged game this is.
That was before this mornings FB post. And most recently no-RS BL talk has only been via third party relay of conversations and/or emails they had with BL. From this morning's PR:
What happened to the shareholder "reward" from the WAG and CERNER licensing deal?
We know its failure to appear wasn't because of outstanding shares.
Comparing MMR to CSLT because they ONLY had 13 million in revenue going into the IPO? REALLY?
2.1 Billion market cap.
ONLY 86.6 MILLION in outstanding shares.
They had EVIDENCE of performance BEFORE stock sale as opposed to fluff projected to occur AFTER PRs targeting stock sales. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Ive been concerned about an RS as well.
Lets just see if he plans to bend us over and "reward" us with an RS before we have a chance to see the factual WAG "Reward" in that 10q, contrasted with factual PERFORMANCE ($$$) in 10K.
I have full faith that MMR's IP is very much valid and will be proved so beyond its already legitimate status of being issued by the PTMO.
However, with zero validation ($$$$) exposed from WAG settlement and CERNER licensing deal, and PPS that says what was exposed was anti-climatic at best, the argument repeated on here about the WAG settlement being desired by MMR as much as WAG, to quell invalidity claims from Walgreens, has merit. Therefore, this makes any invalidity claims from the other four defendants, due tomorrow as per the scheduling order, all the more in need of our scrutiny. Why? We can look back and compare to what was in WAG's invalidity contentions. If we see the same thing (e.g. prior art) in the other defendant's claims submitted tomorrow, well that tells us something doesn't it. Something that should have already been revealed to us as shareholders. Or, maybe we will see that the remaining defendants claims are different. That would be a good thing (e.g. if WAGs invalidity claims were so good, others would use them right?).
Or you can continue to be duped by strings of "on the rainbow to pot-O-gold" PRs.
Go MMRF!!!
Tomorrow (27 Mar) is a key date.
Deadline for Defendants to serve Invalidity Contentions (Patent L.R.3-3) and accompanying document production (Patent L.R. 3-4)
Source: MARKMAN SCHEDULING ORDER FOR CONSOLIDATED CLAIM CONSTRUCTION PROCEEDINGS, Filed 01/14/14
Hopefully we will be able to see them on PACER by late tomorrow if any filed by remaining defendants.
https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/iquery.pl
14:45: 1,000,000 shares sold at .025.
WTH? Considering:
The bid was: .0276
The ask was: .0297
The bid was .028 less than 60 seconds prior to that sale.
That's someone that wanted to get out bad.
Im starting to think this isn't just about deals (WAG/Cerner) pumped and diluted out flatter than a pancake (even negative).
Im guessing there is concern for an RS somewhere in there.
I know I am concerned. I don't trust BL not to RS before the reality of the Q/Ks come out and we see what was in those WAG/Cerner deals; actually see the facts $$$$.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=trades&symbol=MMRF
MMR filed answer to SCM's counter-complaint.
Liner had already been shooting holes in SCM's hot air balloon. This latest counter seems to light the basket of SCM's earth bound deflated hot-air balloon on fire.
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/civilcasesummarynet/ui/casesummary.aspx?
I like how the new MMR push uses the "if you like your doctor; you can keep your doctor" lie and uses MMR as the answer for getting your records to the doctor you had to switch to because of Obamacare.
Funny.
You are talking Epic's share of EHR/EMR market, not PHR market. Credibility in comparison demands DD on the PHR market, specifically the non-tethered PHR market.
With that said, the meat of MMR's IP deals with "plug and play" of the PHR. At the core, it is about the patients personal record transmitted to/from EHR/EMR to a PHR.
When talking EPIC and MMR, its not a discussion on who does an EHR better or has the bigger market share (often confused on here). Its how EPIC transmits that patient record to/from either their own patient portal (MyChart) or PHR (Lucy), or third party PHR.
Good reference about the challenges of the PHR market.
https://www.microhealthllc.com/why-personal-health-records-are-slow-to-adopt/
EHR market references:
http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/medical-economics/news/why-epics-market-dominance-could-stifle-ehr-and-health-it-innovation?utm_source=feedly
http://www.klasresearch.com/Vendor/54
http://journal.ahima.org/2013/02/06/ehr-market-share-report-shows-top-mu-vendors/
Nihilent is looking to expand its MMR support.
Posted seven days ago, already closed.
Good sign.
http://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/view/12835755?trk=job_view_similar_jobs
CERNER agreement update.
From a contact:
Commonwell's (Cerner) push for national patient identifier. Commonwell has strategy for it that was showcased at HIMSS last month.
The Cerner/MMR deal may be more lucrative than the WAG deal many times over if MMR unique patient identification (1-800 number) is in play.
Joint Commission requires two identifications:
This is a Cerner EHR contract made with Nevada County California. I presume it is still in effect until Nov of this year. Regarding the Cerner/MMR PR, I wonder if MMR will show up on future contracts Cerner makes as an offered non-tethered along with Cerner's PHR? Or to the other extreme, is MMR just going to be an advertisement on Cerner's website?
As you can see, this example shows good chunk of change at table. Need to know if this MMR/Cerner deal has MMR at these tables, or just holding a MMR sign out in the parking lot.
http://www.mynevadacounty.com/nc/bos/cob/docs/Board%20of%20Supervisors%20Supporting%20Documents/2013%20Supporting%20Documents/11-12-2013/08%20Amendment%204%20to%20the%20Purchase%20Agreement%20with%20Cerner%20Corp.pdf
MMRs NHS trust (Great Britain hospitals) link needs to be refreshed as well. Maybe Cerner's connections over there can help.
Two hospitals in the NHS trust. Still a bit early to confirm this particular implementation, but another example where near term we can easily find out if MMR is "offered" via Cerner "software."
http://www.ehi.co.uk/news/ehi/9293/lewisham-puts-back-cerner-go-live