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.
4Godnwv: I think both are absurd, but this has become a Nation of the absurd.
Is watching an interview of Levi Johnston your preference?
LG
Even on FBN I am being subjected to listening to Barney Franks. You know, the guy that had a gay prostitution ring run out of his DC apartment and did not know, yeah sure.
The idiocy of guys like this is what our Nation's congressional leadership has degenerated to....sigh!
Sadly, this only brings to light the stupidity of our Nation's voters.
If these congressional idiots want to treat AIG like it is in bankruptcy, they should have let it go into bankruptcy, instead of throwing billions and billions of taxpayer dollars down the sink hole that is AIG.
We need an investigation into Congress and what part it leaders and membership played in the ecomonic crisis and the rape of our Nation to fund the bail outs and the liberal agendas.
LG
I can’t believe all the hoopla about the AIG bonuses. What is it 165 million in retention bonuses. Heck, Geithner knew about this, months ago, after all he was involved in the bailout from the get go. The documents were in the original paperwork.
The idiots on Capitol Hill don’t seem disturbed about the over 105 billion of the 170 billion in bailout funds to AIG, that it used to pay to U.S. and international banks including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and Societe Generale, to cover collateral payments, cancel derivatives contracts and meet obligations at its securities lending business.
As usual our political leaders are caught in the attention minutia instead of dealing with the real issues. How about this for a “claw back”? Let’s have all those that have served in our federal government on a political basis since 1970 give back every penny they have been paid (including retirement monies and expense monies), as they have been screwing up this country for decades.
Regards,
LG
dhwco: No baiting and no it does not mean I do or do not support, it means exactly what I said. Setting aside any bias, I was thinking that either the lawsuit succeeds or it fails which should draw an end to this long saga of uncertainty for the true believers. However, reading the latest soap opera unfolding on the thread, I am beginning to think this "is" the NEVER ENDING STORY...LOL
LG
p2k: prove that you are authentic and criticise the diacs until you do i will consider your drivel to be nothing short of disengenious
I don’t have enough information about what is going on regarding the lawsuit to criticize. To do so would be disingenuous.
its possible that you could get sued however for interference as you have, if i recall correctly, to a number of shareholders to contact various entities regarding calypso and have served to possibly put the kabash on things or so you have been blamed
Making subtle inquires to confirm claims in press releases or notices placed on Company websites, is proper investor due diligence, especially given the number of prior press releases that never materialized. Nothing I've done even comes close to warranting a suit. Heck, the SEC suggests investors do it.
However, some of the stuff I've been reading by you and others on this board this year, does!
Personally, I think this lawsuit is the make or break chance for investors. As I said months ago in private to "dirt man", for the sake of those longs that have not touted or pumped, I hope they have a chance to at the least get their money back, if not profit.
LG
Sosa: I can't speak for the others, but I told "dirt man" in private that I hoped for the sake of the folks that bought in and had refrained from touting and pumping, that they could be at the least made whole (get their money back). I’ve made it a point since, to just observe for the most point.
The bashing that has gone on this year on this thread by some of the investors makes anything we have ever written pale in comparison.
LG
droy24: Contacting Nokia to see if a trial was in the works is hardly sabotage. And no I haven't contacted T-Mobile.
Looking at some of the things you have written since the first of the year, makes anything I've ever written seem tame.
LG
droy24: I don't remember if I sent an email or not, but if I did it in keeping with my practice, it would have been only to inquire if the reported deal was indeed legit, given the Company's history of reporting deals that never materialized.
Any other email signed LG would have not been sent by me.
And by the way, how would you know what anyone was hoping? And how would you know about an email to Baxter in the first place? This kind of stuff is just one of the reasons the SEC should have investigated long ago.
You are another one of the long-term, pumps. Folks that have lost money in this should be taking a hard look at you as well.
LG
droy24: Maybe this thread should get put on the legal teams payroll...gg
LG
p2k: Last time you were spewing trash about the Company , its owners and management, was just before the Turrini announcement, the last pump that worked. I believe the saviour pump was good for a from two cents per share to fifty cents per share ramp there abouts.
So are you up to your old tricks, talking down the stock?
If not, the stuff you are spewing could get you sued by Diac. Or, maybe some of the folks that lost their retirement money in this stock listening to all your encouragement to buy and hold might consider suing you.
Frankly you have no credibility. Folks shouldn't believe anything you write. Of course, when they can understand what you are writing....LOL
LG
dhwco: It seems they left off Jimmy Williamson, P.C.
What say you?
Assignment: 4
Reel/Frame:
020837/0403 Recorded: 04/22/2008 Pages: 12
Conveyance:
PATENT MORTGAGE AND SECUIRTY AGREEMENT
Assignor:
CALYPSO WIRELESS, INC.
Exec Dt: 04/03/2008
Assignees:
JIMMY WILLIAMSON, P.C.
4310 YOAKUM BOULEVARD
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77006
DAIC, DRAGO
11 LAKE STERLING GATE DRIVE
SPRINT, TEXAS 77379
Correspondent:
JONATHAN PIERCE
600 TRAVIS, SUITE 7100
HOUSTON, TX 77002
dhwco: I have a few questions for you...
- Did Carlos ever get completely bought out or did a few folks just get sucked into paying up for a few million shares only to see the buyout plan stall after they ponied up the money? I believe you were part of that buyout, no?
- Did Drago Diac ever get completely compensated for the patent, in money and or in shares?
- It would seem to me, that Turrini and Valenti are being given way to much good will. Exactly what has Valenti ever done or accomplished? Exactly what has Turrini ever taken to completion? Exactly why do you folks believe in and trust them so much?
- Obviously there are significant conflicts of interest for current board members.
Since the inception of Calypso Wireless in 1998, it has never posted a dollar of revenue, has never managed to sell anything, has never managed to complete a single deal, of all the trials and deals announced over the years.
It has been over ten years, what in the hell does it take for you folks to get clued in?
LG
Here is a Guide to Texas Law...
The Civil Process
The parties in a civil lawsuit are known as the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff brings the lawsuit against the defendant by having his or her attorney file a petition or complaint with a court. The complaint states what the dispute is about, why the defendant is responsible, and asks the court to take a stated course of action, usually awarding money damages. Other forms of remedy can also be sought, such as an injunction, which bars a person from doing a specific act, either temporarily or on a permanent basis. The plaintiff also serves a copy of the complaint, together with a summons, on the defendant. A summons is an official court document notifying the defendant that he or she must answer the complaint in writing within a specified period of time. If the defendant does not answer in time, the plaintiff wins by default.
The defendant's written response to the complaint is known as the answer. The answer admits or denies allegations in the complaint. It also states any defenses to the complaint, such as if there is a lack of subject matter jurisdiction or the statute of limitations has already expired. The answer can also contain any counterclaims that the defendant would like to make against the plaintiff. The counterclaims, however, have to relate to the plaintiff's complaint. The defendant cannot counterclaim about entirely unrelated issues--that would be a different lawsuit.
As any lawyer can tell you, an uncomplicated lawsuit is a rarity. Plaintiffs may sue additional defendants and bring them into the original lawsuit. Outside parties with related claims sometimes wish to intervene. Defendants may make counterclaims against the plaintiff, sue other third parties and bring them into the original suit, or even sue other co-defendants. For situations in which there is a large class of plaintiffs with similar claims against one or more defendants, plaintiffs can seek to file a class action lawsuit. An example of a class action would be people all over the country who have been hurt by a product and who sue the manufacturer in one single action. The rationale behind such suits is that both plaintiffs and defendants benefit by having one large lawsuit rather than hundreds or thousands of individual ones. The Class Action Law Chapter describes class action lawsuits.
In preparation for trial, parties often gather information from one another and from other sources. This period of information gathering is known as discovery. Discovery can take a number of different forms. Parties can ask one another for copies of documents; they can submit interrogatories, which are written questions the other party must answer under oath; they can ask the other party to submit to a physical or mental examination and provide the examination results; or they can conduct depositions, which are sworn statements by witnesses conducted in question and answer form.
The vast majority of cases settle before the parties reach the courthouse steps. Sometimes the cost and effort of preparing for trial will persuade parties to reevaluate their positions. Parties may negotiate their own settlement or use some means of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to bridge their differences. Since July 1, 1994, parties to a civil lawsuit in Texas have been required to consider the possibility of settlement through ADR (the Alternative Dispute Resolution Chapter). Another way a lawsuit can be concluded before reaching trial is through a summary judgment. If, after the complaint and answer have been filed, it is clear that there is no dispute concerning the facts, only the parties' interpretation of the facts, then the judge will grant a motion of summary judgment and make a decision by applying the facts to the law.
However, if there is a genuine dispute about the facts in the case and the parties are not interested in settling, they will proceed to trial. An outline of how a trial is conducted follows a discussion of the criminal process.
The Trial Process
Whether a case is civil or criminal, the basic process of a trial is similar. The decision maker in a trial can be either a judge or a jury. In civil cases, the parties may have a right to a jury, depending on the subject matter, whether there is an issue of fact to be decided, or whether one party has applied for a jury trial. All defendants facing serious criminal charges have an absolute right to a jury. Juries consist of 12 jurors in the district courts (or fewer in civil cases if the parties agree) and six in the county courts and justice of the peace courts.
The first step in a jury trial is jury selection, otherwise known as voir dire. During voir dire the attorneys, and occasionally the judge, ask questions of potential jurors in an attempt to gauge their capacity to be fair and impartial. Persons who may somehow be biased or whom the attorney believes will not be sympathetic to his or her case can be removed through a process known as a peremptory challenge. Each attorney has a limited number of peremptory challenges and cannot remove a prospective juror for reasons such as sex or race. After a jury is selected, the members are sworn in.
Next come the opening statements. Each side tells the jurors its version of the case and what it intends to prove. The plaintiff in a civil case (and the prosecution in a criminal case) gives its opening statement first. Following opening statements, the plaintiff or prosecution proceeds with the evidence of its case. One form of evidence is the testimony of witnesses. The plaintiff or prosecution will ask a witness to the witness stand and, after the witness is sworn in, will ask him or her some questions. This is known as direct examination. After the plaintiff or prosecution is finished, the defense is then permitted to ask the witness some questions. This is called cross-examination. After cross-examination, the plaintiff or prosecution may again question the witness. This is known as redirect examination. Evidence also can take other forms, such as documents, charts, pictures, and audio or video recordings.
After the plaintiff or prosecution has finished presenting its case, it is the defendant's turn. This time, the defense can call witnesses for direct examination and the plaintiff or prosecution will conduct cross-examination. During both the plaintiff's or prosecution's case and the defense's case, attorneys will make objections about what questions can be asked of the witnesses and what evidence can be introduced into the record. There are very specific rules governing what evidence is admissible.
After both sides have concluded presenting their cases, the attorneys give closing arguments. In closing, an attorney will attempt to summarize the evidence presented and explain why his or her side should prevail. If a judge is deciding the case, he or she will thank everyone involved and render a decision within a certain period of time, usually 90 days. If a jury is deciding the case, the judge will instruct the jury as to what law must be applied to the evidence of the case.
One area in which the civil and criminal trial processes differ is the standard of proof. In a civil trial, the plaintiff generally must prove his or her case by a "preponderance of the evidence." Another way to put this is "more likely than not." In a criminal trial, the prosecution must prove its case "beyond a reasonable doubt." The criminal standard is higher because in a criminal case, a person's liberty, perhaps even his or her life, may be at stake. In a civil case the jury verdict need not be unanimous. If 10 out of 12 or five out of six jurors agree as to how the case should be resolved, that is enough for a verdict. In a criminal trial, the jury must be unanimous. If it is not, a hung jury is declared and the case may be tried again.
Both parties in a civil trial and the defendant in a criminal trial have the right to appeal a decision if they believe some error was made. Prosecutors, however, cannot appeal a not guilty verdict. (A discussion of the federal and state appellate courts is contained in The Texas Court System Chapter.)
http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/tx/law/c03.html
Given the number of lawsuits Calypso Wireless has been involved with over the years, with not one making it to the trial stage, you folks should already know the outcome...
LG
dhwco: Next Week...
If you are correct that Calypso Wireless does not possess the patient (Diac and others do) and did not possess the patient at the time the suit was filed (making Calypso Wireless the incorrect party to file the infringement lawsuit), I am surprised that T-Mobil's council has not motioned for a dismissal on those grounds...
LG
atlas101: If you can't get anyone to answer the phone at the office, you might try one of these locations...gg
http://houston.citysearch.com/bestof/winners/strip_club
LG
chunga1: I would call him a conservative...gg
LG
h24ever: I knew he was in the running and was surprised to learn a few days ago he was not a member of the RNC.
At any rate, Michael Steele is a very good choice for the RNC...
LG
frenchee: Thanks for the link...
It seems living the nightmare of her early years has produced quite the well spoken advocate. A message that needs to be spread.
I will share this links with others, I suggest everyone that reads this thread do the same...
LG
Prez upset over Thain's 1.2 million office remodeling, but how about the Prez spending 120 million on inauguration parties?
IMO, just as outrageous...
LG
PS: "Do as I say, not as I do"...seems to be the theme with the new Prez and VP.
Wyatt Lee: Fair enough...
Regards,
LG
Wyatt Lee: "Monkey"
Let's not go there. This is the Liberal Free Chat Zone, not the KKK thread. If I am wrong, someone let me know and I'll stop posting here.
LG
Wyatt Lee: You give Biden way to much intellectual credit...
LG
I think I am going to be sick...
Biden in charge of rescuing the middle class, Mr Charity himself...sigh!
If you look up the word Charity in the Dictionary there would be a picture of Biden as with no prodding from anyone he and his bride donated .002 of their income to charity over a ten year period. Can you say philanthropic, they gave the unbelievably huge amount of two tenths of a penny of every single dollar they made. There should be a monument erected in his honor in Washington DC.
Couple that with being the single most liberal Senator during his multi term tenure and you may just have one of the biggest hypocrites that has ever lived.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-12-biden-financial_N.htm
LG
PS: And this is the man that has the audacity to use patriotism to shame those of us paying this country’s bills, when we complain about the liberals intent on raising our taxes to fund their vote buying agendas.
riskybiz1: I did not WRITE that everyone that came on MSNBC was a left wing zealot, just the staff. Reread my post, slowly.
Bottom line...to watch MSNBC is to support.
LG
riskybiz1: MSNBC is not CNBC, but both are part of NBC and all are biased to the left, with MSNBC staffed by left wing zealots. Do yourself a favor and get a cable service that offers FOX Business News or Bloomberg...
LG
Longhorn 2006: Exactly, and until more white Americans are ready to step up to the plate and say enough of this racist bullshit used to control white dissention, it will not end.
LG
White Is Beautiful Too
m_stone_14: I'll bet they don't lampoon her the same way..
Lampoon is to gentle of description. The left is a nasty, vile, disgusting, vulgar horde.
LG
m_stone_14: Considering that many of these politicos seem to be at best, borderline morons, maybe they see her as some sort of Dem answer to Palin...
LG
Get one while you still can...
http://www.impactguns.com/store/818513004749.html
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/87003/p90_instructor/
LG
h24ever: I just sent a link to Glen Beck...
LG
Glen Beck: Talking about the Central Banking system on FOX. His life is now in danger...
LG
h24ever: The MSM is anti white, they will NOT cover it. The MSM has already NOT covered it...
LG
h24ever: Can you imagine the outrage of the MSM if a Republican or conservative had said, "no black construction workers".
WAKE UP SILENT MAJORITY BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE
LG
Hell, I can't get away from Obama, even on Fox News today. Maybe there is a market for an Obama channel on cable...sigh!
LG
kdquared: Has any new administration had so many press conferences and gleaned so much air time in such a short time span? These socialist are already making me ill.
Enduring a major attack on our country is a high price to pay to get these zealots out of favor, a price I pray we do not have to pay.
LG
EZreduz: Republican politicians rolling over like street hoes with a matress tied to their backs hollering curb service...
LG
berge: Well that post was intended as sarcasm, well at least I hope it proves to be sarcasm...sigh!
LG
Longhorn 2006: In Hillary's speech today to the State Department, she said they (meaning Obama, her and the Dems) are no longer going to tolerate divisiveness.
Which means, non one is allowed to disagree with them...sigh!
LG
berge: I am waiting for Obama and the Dems to suggest the solution to illegal immigration is to add Mexicans to their income tax credit program, so Mexicans can benefit from the wealth redistribution and for the US to build a few hospitals in Mexico and staff them, thus providing the free health care illegal Mexican immigrants now enjoy in the US, but from the comfort of their own country.
The end results will be a more stable boarder. There will be little reason for Mexicans to cross the boarder illegally.
I am thinking, Obama and the Dems (with the help of key Republicans of course) may consider giving Mexicans the right to vote in our elections as well...sigh!
LG
Longhorn 2006: This is exactly right...
His goal is to bring about a more equivalent consequence to each citizen's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness through federal interventions that move the government beyond its role as protector of those truths to aggressive arbiter of equalized outcomes. Also known as spreading the wealth.
Our founding fathers' creed was that all have the right to the "pursuit of happiness", not a "guarantee of happiness" by redistributing wealth. Obama and the Democratic Party are hell bent on taking the US down the road of socialism with the support of many Republican leaders.
To do so will guarantee the Democratic Socialist Party more and more votes, well until the economy stops working and the US Government has to start writing IOUs to those in the wealth redistribution lines.
I know many conservatives believe that Obama will ultimately fail and that will usher in a new era similar to Ronald Reagan following Jimmy Carter, but the US is not in the same place it was back then. The damage our Government has done and is about to do to our country will take a generation to undo.
Buy a Boy Scout manual. I have one in each of our three emergency packs. You might want to purchase a copy of Peter Shciff’s book “Crash Proof” as well.
LG