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.
I see they filed their 10-Q.
MBMoney, as it looks HDC appears to be doing what they normally do, nothing. I mean their Attorney's are but George doesn't seem motivated enough to knock on any doors to try and land some licensing deals. Seems to me the COVID -19 got the company in a headlock?
Damn, HDC has been in a headlock long before COVID-19 like 17 years?
It does appear to me.... at least has me thinking....that HDC never had anything to really stand on and Little Bighorn is about to play out again. This time his horse turned and he reached down and grabbed a bag of goodies. Then galloped into the sunset leaving all us on the ground with bullet holes in our backs.
I'm just cleaning out files and documents and ran across these so don't know if they of any value to anyone else or even if the links are active?........
USPTO Suggest Machine Learning Algorithms Are Patentable.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180419/10123139671/uspto-suggests-that-ai-algorithms-are-patentable-leading-to-whole-host-ip-ethics-questions.shtml
Are Machine Learning Algorithms Patentable?
https://arapackelaw.com/patents/softwaremobile-apps/are-machine-learning-algorithms-patentable/
Can you Patent an Algorithm
http://www.bartkasperolaw.com/can-you-patent-an-algorithm/
Everything You Need To Know?
https://www.upcounsel.com/algorithm-patents
I understand and know what you are saying but I can't help but think 17 years ago around this month our share price was higher.
Again thank you Alan, I know over the years from time to time I had thought about buying more shares but would not. I am also glad I have talked with several about unloading at least enough shares to lighten their positions.
Alan...thank you, I couldn't post until today. It doesn't sound too great for HDC but how are the Attorneys being paid. I believe cash up to a certain point would be mandatory out of Attorney/client relationship.
It will be interesting to see if the Judge grants HDC the ability to respond but it appears the Judge could just refuse this case on pretrial grounds, that the case could possibly never even be fully heard or rather granted discovery or granted the right to discovery.
I wonder from your knowledge if you believe Intel had been working on this case structuring for a longtime or that they use a generic approach then seek out cases of past involvement. No doubt a large legal staffing worldwide but curious of all the massive supporting documents and prior cases along with various court actions over the years. It appear that Intel (to me) is pile driving this in a way that very little support maybe heard from HDC yet our Attorneys are not slackers.
In the back of my head I'm sure everyone that has tried to read and understand my posts can at least recall me saying that I wondered if HDC was just doing this lawsuit as a last move to justify any closing of HDC in the near future. I mean if HDC is defending and also going after corporations in some legal manner what investor or group would ever keep pursuing and really think they have any better chance in squeezing HDC for financial gain or perhaps some other outcome.
King...these patents are far more than just "Mathematical algorithms" and is why we were authorized patents. They can be challenged in other ways but not what they are claiming....just another hope and poke stalling tactic that they hope will stick.
Mathematical algorithms can be patented but they must be able to do 2 or 3 other operations too. Without the other instructions/operations then they can not be patented but HDC patents or some go far beyond the realm of typical.
I read this a year or so ago...actually when Alan first arrived in this message thread. He is so gifted and I hope he can make sense of my post and explain why some can be patented and some not when it comes to these algorithms.
______________
MBMoney I'm not accessing documents until the case gets heated up.
I believe the only reason Quirk backed away is possibly because in time he will be used within the Vennwest case. I feel Bear isn't a threat unless coupled with Quirk and or with or by Vennwest. She will stay at bay until needed by Vennwest and the same with Quirk. I'm sure HDC is fully aware of things as such and is why HDC pressed example on Bear recently.
Will we hear anything new referencing new patent applications or are we at our end as many of us believe to be the truth. Is this quest to sue INTEL Custer's last stand, perhaps the Alamo or neither?
STANDING ORDER REGARDING NOTICE OF READINESS FOR SCHEDULING CONFERENCE IN PATENT CASES
In all patent cases pending before the undersigned, after all Defendants have responded to the initial pleadings (whether by Answer or Motion), the Parties are directed to meet-and-confer within seven (7) days of the last Answer or Motion to discuss any pre-Markman issues and the Parties shall jointly file the Case Readiness Status Report ("CRSR") in the format attached as Exhibit A promptly thereafter. Plaintiff shall be responsible for ensuring the prompt submission of the CRCR.Plaintiff shall also email the Court (TXWDml Law Clerks Judge Albright@txwd.uscourts.gov) a courtesy copy of the CRSR and shall also copy the Defendants .
SIGNED this 22nd day of September, 2020.
ALAN D ALB HT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
__________________________________
ExhibIT A
__________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION
CASE READINESS STATUS REPORT
Plaintiff [name] and Defendant [name(s)], hereby provide the following status report in advance of the initial Case Management Conference (CMC).
FILING AND EXTENSIONS
Plaintiffs Complaint was filed on [filing date]. There have been [one/two] extension[s] for a total of_ days.
RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT
[Indicate if/when the defendant(s) responded to the Complaint, whether it was an Answer or Motion, and whether any counterclaims were filed other than counterclaims for non-infringement
or invalidity]
PENDING MOTIONS
[Identify all pending motions]
RELATED CASES IN THIS JUDICIAL DISTRICT
[Identify all related cases in this Judicial District, including any other cases where a common patent is asserted]
IPR, CBM, AND OTHER PGR FILINGS
[There are no known IPR, CBM, or other PGR filings.] [Or] ALT: IPR2020-00000 was filed on and docketed on . A Final Written decision is expected on or before __.]
NUMBER OF ASSERTED PATENTS AND CLAIMS
Plaintiff has asserted [Num Patents] patent[s] and a total of[Num Claims] claims-, [If a Plaintiff has already served Preliminary Infringement Contentions ("PICs"),note the date of service. Note: Per the Court's Order Governing Proceeding, Plaintiff must serve PICs no later than 7 days before the CMCl
APPOINTMENT OF TECHNICAL ADVISER
[Indicate whether the parties request a technical adviser to be appointed to the case to assist the Court with claim construction or other technical issues]
MEET AND CONFER STATUS
Plaintiff and Defendant conducted a meet & confer conference. [The parties have no pre¬Markman issues to raise at the CMC.] or [The parties identified the following pre-Markman issues to raise at the CMC
....to proceed with 1st court conference call.
Look, as for what was done today involving HDC/Intel in the Waco, Texas court case was simply a readiness ping to the parties no big deal and isn't worth me re-printing it in this thread. The court wants a case readiness status report from the parties. I gather HDC/Intel Attorneys will talk to each other and have all documents ready for court to proceed.
________VERY EARLY DAYS, VERY!!!_______________
Cisco Told to Pay $1.9 Billion in Patent Trial Loss
(Bloomberg) -- Cisco Systems Inc. was told to pay $1.9 billion after losing a trial brought by a Virginia company that claimed the networking giant copied patented cybersecurity features and shut the smaller company out of government contracts.
Cisco infringed four patents owned by Centripetal Networks Inc., District Judge Henry Morgan in Norfolk ruled. The judge heard the monthlong trial over video conference in June after canceling the use of a jury because of the coronavirus pandemic. Centripetal Networks, based in Herndon, Virginia, said it developed a network protection system, funded in part by a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, only to see Cisco integrate the inventions into its own networks after meetings and presentations by Centripetal officials.
“The fact that Cisco released products with Centripetal’s functionality within a year of these meetings goes beyond mere coincidence,” Morgan said.
The judge said Centripetal was owed $755.8 million for past use of the inventions, which he increased by two-and-a-half times after finding that Cisco’s infringement was “willful and egregious.” He also ordered that Cisco pay a 10% royalty on sales of some of its products for the next three years, and then 5% in royalties for three years after that.
The total damage award accounts for less than three months of profit for Cisco. The company reported net income of more than $11.04 billion for calendar year 2019. It’s also one of the most cash-rich companies in technology. In August it reported cash, cash equivalents and investments of $29.4 billion.
Cisco said its cybersecurity features were developed long before Centripetal was founded a decade ago. San Jose, California-based Cisco said Centripetal hasn’t been successful in getting government and university contracts because its ideas were too complicated.
Cisco pledged to appeal.
Centripetal said sales had been doubling each year from 2015 until it met with Cisco for a partnership and “got close to getting married but got left at the altar,” as Centripetal lawyer Paul Andre of the firm Kramer Levin put it in opening arguments.
Centripetal officials met with those from Cisco in the first half of 2016.
“They told them about our algorithms, told them about the patents,” Andre said in closing arguments. “Cisco kept coming back and asking for more.”
In June 2017, Cisco announced its Encrypted Traffic Analytics, which David Goeckeler, then head of Cisco’s network and security, said “solves a network security challenge previously thought to be unsolvable.”
Cisco lawyer Dabney Carr of Troutman Sanders said Cisco, founded in 1999, has a long history of developing network security products and even has written books on the topic. “Cisco is proud of the network security it provides; it just doesn’t infringe these patents,” Carr said in closing arguments. He said there is a “cavernous gap” between what the patents cover and Centripetal’s infringement allegations.
The judge found that the introduction of the cybersecurity features resulted in “a dramatic increase in sales which Cisco touted in both technical and marketing documents.”
The trial was originally supposed to be held before a jury but the courthouse is closed to the public because of the coronavirus pandemic. Instead, Morgan, who became a federal judge in 1991 and took senior status in 2004, conducted the trial over the Zoom teleconferencing app.
The opinion was released after Morgan issued an order denying Cisco’s request that he recuse himself from the case. The judge’s wife owns shares of Cisco, bought at the recommendation of a broker. Morgan said he had already reached his conclusion on the case, though not finished writing the opinion, when he learned of the ownership.
The case is Centripetal Networks Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., 18-94, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (Norfolk).
(Corrects figure in sixth pargraph.)
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
_________________________________
I must say, I do see a similarity in our court case, sincerely!
We now have 139 Institutional investments as of yesterday so now I'm sure some can see why we had to move back down in share price value.
Good question about Intel but honestly I believe Intel is not worried about HDC one way or another and regardless if HDC was a billion dollar company or what we have always been a nothing.
I don't know and sure I could be wrong but anyone here that reads these posts and has a clue what it takes to bring a product to market from A to Z know full well regardless of such luck as Intel settling and flipping us like $400k really doesn't do much at all. HDC is basically washed up and done regardless of any possible settlement as $400k or so.
HDC needs a royalty stream as side from any settlement. This is the area that many of us have indicated and recall MBMoney talking as such too.
Like! what in the world has HDC been doing besides waiting on Intel. We should have had collaboration dealings with money following in had our patents (those remaining, few actually) been worth much.
People can talk all they want about HDC can't do anything because of existing lawsuits and that is a bunch of nonsense. Many corporation have suits going at the same time they are extending new contracts and contracting and besides their damn attorneys handle that the CEO and his staff are our drumming up business but it looks look HDC isn't doing anything.
Is it possible they are do-nothing democrats? You gotta have humor too to ease the pain!
I had been thinking about "Bear" and still wonder what part does she actually play in the process of Quirk/Vennwest? (and possibly Canadian Kevin?) If she was just used HDC shouldn't screw with her but if she is related in any way to Vennwest or Quirk then we will watch them rescue her. I doubt HDC really will pursue her unless they know for sure that she is tied to the hip with them. Common sense says if she was used and abused by them she might come forth and talk with HDC attorneys?
...also I still wonder about all those Exhibit B Investors?
Any thoughts by other investors?
WELL! I gather George has a point referencing Bear, Quirk and Vennwest triple teaming him but I find it strange that George would mention that Venning is involved in additional lawsuits, one of which is against his formal legal counsel, Dentons, who has counter sued
Venning.
* I gather George wasn't trying to rub it into Quirk about him dropping the lawsuit twice but more or less to show that some type of unfairness was involved.
**I sincerely wonder... where does all our investor fairness lies.
The latest 8-k 9/30/20
Item 8.01 Other Events.
As previously disclosed, on February 7, 2020 two shareholders of Health Discovery Corporation (the “Company” or “HDC”), William F. Quirk, Jr. (“Quirk”) and Cindy Bear (“Bear”), filed a complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in DeKalb County Superior Court. Among the items in the motion, Quirk and Bear requested to have a special meeting of the shareholders and Quick and Bear alleged misconduct by the Company and its directors. At the time of the Quirk and Bear complaint, the Company had stated its intent to schedule a shareholder meeting no later than June 30, 2020 and in fact did hold the shareholder meeting on May 27, 2020.
On March 2, 2020, Quirk and Bear filed a notice of dismissal in DeKalb County. Quirk and Bear subsequently filed a new lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court based on substantially similar allegations and seeking similar relief. On March 4, 2020, the Fulton County court ordered a hearing on the emergency motion for a temporary restraining order against the Company for the following day.
At the hearing on March 5, 2020, Quirk and Bear presented their version of the facts through affidavits submitted by both Quirk and Bear, arguing that the affidavits supported the emergency relief they sought. The judge denied the motion and did not enter a temporary restraining order. The court set an evidentiary hearing on Quirk and Bear’s motion for a preliminary injunction for March 27, 2020. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and multiple requests by Quirk and Bear, the scheduling of the hearing was cancelled and has never taken place.
On September 2, 2020, HDC moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that Quirk and Bear lacked standing and failed to state claims for relief. Facing HDC’s motion to dismiss, on September 23, 2020 Quirk voluntarily dismissed the Fulton County case—his second dismissal of these claims.
On September 25, 2020, HDC filed, among other documents, a Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Expenses. HDC’s motion is made pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-41(a)(3), which states “the filing of a second notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication upon the merits.” Additionally, HDC noted in its motion that Mr. Quirk’s claims lacked substantial justification, were commenced and maintained without reasonable cause or for an improper purpose, and HDC’s attorneys’ fees and expenses of litigation in the amount of $192,967.40 are reasonable.
Bear remains a plaintiff in the case. The Company firmly denies Bear’s claims and will continue to vigorously defend itself against these unsubstantiated and unjustified claims. Additionally, Bear has been notified of the Company’s intent to pursue abusive litigation claims against Bear as a result of these claims.
On September 24, 2020, the Company accepted service of a lawsuit filed by Laurie Venning (“Venning”) and one of his companies, Vennwest Global Technologies, Inc. (“Vennwest”) from Alberta, Canada. According to recent publications, Venning is involved in additional lawsuits, one of which is against his formal legal counsel, Dentons, who has countersued Venning.
The Vennwest lawsuit contains virtually identical claims against HDC that Quirk and Bear have alleged. In addition, Vennwest is represented by the same law firm that previously withdrew its representation of Bear and Quirk in their lawsuits. Based upon this and other facts, HDC believes Venning, Quirk, Bear and former directors are coordinating their irresponsible and costly attacks against HDC, its directors and others. As Quirk’s dismissal reflects, the Company believes these claims are without merit and serve only to deplete the Company’s resources to the detriment of its shareholders. Similar to the Bear matter, HDC will vigorously defend itself against these baseless claims and evaluate all options against the plaintiffs including, but not limited to, pursuing counterclaims.
I'm not sure but maybe the company can make money by having losses instead of profits. I don't think you can convert debt to free shares unless keep consistent losses. Maybe that is why we lose more each quarter and the price dropping continues. The company might be able to sell shares but you and I are trapped. It appears to be all legal so maybe that is bugging Vennwest and Quirk.
....but we don't have debt do we? If so what debt? could that be from borrowing money from George & James? I'm just not sure?
You maybe totally correct that Vennwest was trying to correct things but???
George didn't want to bite on a loan deal with Vennwest. Was that because it "may" have been introduced by Kevin and possibly Quirk? If Kevin and Quirk didn't want to pursue NeoGenomic's lawsuit then why would George even consider dealing with Vennwest - Canada - and or Kevin - Canada. Needless to say most here can't trust Quirk either and I say this as anyone can read the past posts and selective emails where Quirk was siding with Barnhill then against him and then cozy with all of us retail investors then throws us aside and becomes cozy with management again and even become director again what a circus.
So it all comes down to this. Not anyone past or present involved in HDC can be trusted. So in the end "no one" is feeling what? -C O Z Y-
I just wonder? Not that Vennwest and Quirk combine have 80 million shares but we did know Quirk had around 12 million shares left. So does that mean Vennwest is sporting around 50-60 million shares? What are the chances that Vennwest “once” had “B” or “C” series shares but now have just common regardless if they were common shares to begin with or converted.
Let me wonder about the reasons why if I am Vennwest and hold say 50 million common shares and Quirk might still hold 12 million shares why would I not get in on the original lawsuit with Quirk and Bear? Is Bear related to someone in Vennwest or perhaps Quirk?
If I had the kind of investment in HDC that you somewhat sense that Vennwest might have why would I not pursue HDC from the get go? Any problem between the relationship as to business restriction dealing from Canada? Well, perhaps Vennwest felt Quirk might be able to personally pursued HDC to move toward Vennwest in some type of business deal or perhaps get close enough and friendly to buy HDC assets which are dwindling, maybe supply money to fight Intel?
I’m afraid I would have come directly at HDC had I been Vennwest “provided” I had a “remaining” and serious investment in HDC.
Some of the moves these players made are not normal but was that planned or mistakes at pursuing HDC, what move would George counter with?
You have read and posted things that have come directly from Quirk’s emails trying to raise the messiah George to great heights yet if you recall back in 2010 and so forth, remember the fiasco’s.
On another thought is it possible since George has the means to out vote and to control HDC regardless of the entire “existing” shareholders and their holdings that Vennwest and several other know that when it comes time to close shop that the only one that will win might be George?
I have the answer that you and I need. We need Vennwest & Quirk to buy around 350 million shares and let them fight it out with George while the rest of us sell and finally leave Dodge City with our pockets finally half full.
Steve, so... you haven't read any of MBMoney's posts here or from the other message board????
I gather that Vennwest got pissed that George wouldn't deal with them. I mean you know that George doesn't want to deal with Quirk and who knows maybe Kevin & Quirk may have tried to lure HDC into the arms of Vennwest and George seen that fiasco. So with that maybe they feel if they tug hard enough and long enough that George will give in.
Intel, yes that sucks and they will probably win the suit unless HDC forces Jury trial.
As for George/HDC partnering with anyone, that looks bleak coming directly from what HDC HAS SAID AND DONE (NOTHING IN THIS AREA) so HDC created their own crap too!
George has enough shares to totally control the company and those shares I talked about long before "C" series came to pass "D" series so it just doesn't matter with (me) being the CEO cause I still win in the end while all the retail investors can continue to lose as the CEO I win.
Anyone here that thinks HDC has really done their best at trying to partner with anyone except themselves had better take a serious look and know HDC has done nothing in this area. If they did and you were them would you not tell your investors? Would you not keep your investors informed on such things.
It is time for a post by MBMoney!
Here is another post I found today........
So ole Billy boy (Quirk) dismisses case 2020CV333862 without prejudice which means he can still pursue HDC in the future. Bears name was not on the dismissal so anyone can take a guess what is or is not next at Peyton Place.
So? Does this mean Quirk is coming back on board at HDC? Does it mean that Quirk shouldn’t or need not pursue HDC “IF” involved in any way with Vennwest? Is Quirk working his way into Vennwest as a director of some sort?
Where is Kevin? No not Kevin in Ocala but Kevin in or from Canada. Why heck he ought to sue HDC too!...I mean things won’t be the same without his input. I mean look at all that Kevin done to us I mean for us for no pay, absolutely nothing right?
Now wouldn’t Peyton be complete with the Barnhill showing up I mean what is really left to this side show.
Well, it would seem to me since most of us didn’t know about Vennwest being in the background prior to Quirk pouncing on HDC then perhaps those on the Exhibit B list are waiting and pushing behind Vennwest in order to soften HDC a tad. It would seem with some of the professionals and past directors and Attorney’s positioned with their dollars in this that they are possibly talking and filing complaints with the SEC among other possibilities.
The above makes rooms for HDC message thread conversations so lets do some talking about this as we all are shareholders here and have spent many years watching and waiting for management to do right for their shareholders.
MBMoney, I see your other post, I recall talking to the SEC about a year and a half ago and at that time it was about HDC not filing in general. Now I’m talking on the phone with this dude, and as you might know, he is, and many as such are Attorney's. He explained to me that me, just telling him of any problem I see involving any corporation that is under the SEC reach take I must file a complaint or nothing in my concern matters to them. They must have a paper trail. So what I am saying is you must fill out a complaint at the SEC website and then they will follow up on the complaint but will also connect with you first.
What you are saying is spot on and I recall all that. The timing was so full of chit when they did that deal. (as soon as I seen you post with that "April 22" date sparks were flying out of my ears.)
Hey I'm ready to fly anywhere lets wake up George and see if he will talk to us....or maybe Fly to Canada, I haven't been their in a while, maybe Lonni or whatever his name is will talk with us.
I gather the only real option is to send out emails to everyone within the Exhibit B list and try to get a few of the old directors motivated enough to shake the tree. Maybe Braswell or Tobin might file a suit against HDC but do not want to see Barnhill anywhere near HDC again.
No doubt HDC has a way to make an investor bark at the moon even if you can't see it...I mean our history and all the patents we once had. Someone had to make money some how would you not agree.
Were the patents actually used by someone else and HDC was just a decoy???...illusion
_____________________
Long ago past........another thingy that was never really followed up on was (Richard E Caruso) but what the heck.
It was agreed much earlier that the company can determine a new series preferred shares without a shareholders vote. At the time I believe there were no "C" series involved so 21 million "D" series didn't bust the party but yes it would on any voting issues. Since the last structure change there are no throttling governors on George-HDC.
Now I can find all the supporting information but this crap just isn't worth it to me.
(and yes I did post at one time that George could NOT change/make a new series without shareholder approval (aside from his heavy holdings now) I was wrong as you can see the language change in a prior shareholders meeting between 2015-2017....actually it will be filed in MAY or June of those years. Might even scan Google for quicker hit.
450 MC / 45 MP "C"
A/S both
Another thing! Who can prove "intent verse a mistake", furthermore how about an intentional mistake?
The waters get thicker and thicker!
From what I have seen the timing doesn't seem to matter as long as they correct their documents, specially corporation updates. As for the SEC do they really care? As long as those documents get straighten than same seems to be the case with them.
Look at it this way....unless some heavy hitters were to file a complaint not (Vennwest) why would anything change. I figure like Quirk, if Vennwest got what they wanted that's great for them but we would still be sitting in a tree waiting on a ladder (if you know what I mean).
I look at this way is HDC doing us right by not filing an 8K referencing Vennwest? Of course not but I see George CEO of HDC as not being true to us investors yet you know Quirk as do the many other shareholders that may read this.
Also, you know like me of some of the professional hitters involved in this and others who have high shares in this and if they don't give a damn or can't file with the state of Georgia or perhaps raise hell within the SEC what in the world can we do.
I sincerely mean this that I wish HDC and the entire share structure and all shares disintegrate into thin air. HDC has been nothing but a thorn in our butt forever but if we lose I want to see the CEO lose too!!!
Something many past investors have forgotten and it has been mentioned by MBMoney too, HDC entire focus in the early days was all about developing "Biomarkers" but gather like everything else that morphs into something else and basically falls to the wayside except one past director, no not Moore.
I just don't believe the Judge will allow the depth of discovery depth that HDC needs. I think HDC would settle for $600k including legal fees. Even would that kind of money there isn't anything in the past or present to hold the share price up. HDC needs to somehow pull royalties and have Intel develop product and downstream sales plus marketing. HDC could never handle that.
I gather if George is tired of messing with this he will try to dump the company into Intel's lap if at all possible. The other needling is the exiting lawsuits. It appears none of the Directors involved in HDC history will ever see eye to eye which breeds another problem so how does George hold onto to all his shares and leave?
Jury award is where I believe the $600-$650 will come from but what will HDC actually pocket?
What is in the mind of our CEO is very important? How is his health and how much is this playing on his mind and his families however, how much of the load is Marty doing? If Marty is carrying the ball for George then HDC may not throw in the towel on first offer from Intel.
It has been expressed privately between many of us shareholders that we see nothing else developing as to licensing other entities so that brings me back to my original thought which is (Intel) is our last stand before George winds this up.
King, I forgot to post the most important thingy that I can....
Give HDC $300K - $600K then what? As you see we "more" than basically will be too close to the end of patent life cycle so any products probably would never happen.
Now what would be cool is to have Intel collaborate with us and develop some type of product(s)
My problem is the years I have been here plus I just don't believe there is enough technical know how for HDC to actually co-develop.
Now George did see us through the NeoGenomic fiasco and is he actually done with NeoGenomic Corporation. In the same breath he had also been hard at work trying to get Intel off their buns. No doubt George and crew have done a great job or documentations and working with our Patent Attorneys and no doubt some type of involvement with our inventors.
Now it would be nice to see .50 per share offered and maybe "Good_Sport" will walk away with $500k which may make his day.
Alan? that seems to be a strange post for you? Provided that Intel and HDC are in discussions how do you tabulate the $400k figure...is it normal for Intel from a figure such as $250k to $400K or are you messing around with Good_Sport?
Look, we need $650k from Intel or else Jury trial and bigger award even though all our patents are about exhausted like me.
King Oil, it doesn't matter to me who buys or sells I just would like to break even and left Dodge City. I hope the best to any buyers or sellers I'm pretty much toasted after all these years.
I feel pretty much the same except the time I have in this hurts me deeply.
Yes, Moore is in the same boat yet he feels he is a stand up guy and has done everything to us I mean for us like Quirk has!
At any rate Moore wants George to take back what he said about him not doing his job and providing HDC with updates
BTW...we all know the real answers to all this don't we but let's play the HDC game of chance.
Questions for $100 dollars Oops I mean .50 cents
Who has done more to shareholders I mean for shareholders.
1.George
2.Moore
3.Quirk
4.None of the above.
MBMoney, you would think that some of the old directors as far back as Bob Braswell on through to several years ago would try to enact something in a positive way but also feel they might view their past holdings in HDC as a lost cause anyways. Most of these old directors and so forth are very successful such as Bob since he distant himself from Williams and doing his own business.
Maybe look at this way, I recall talking with Braswell many many years ago when he was setting up Direct Wireless in Waco, Texas! Hey we basically started in Waco and maybe HDC may end it's life in Waco, Texas messing with Intel.
Who will get the leftover scraps? We all know don't we? Everyone except retail shareholders.
MBMoney, there are enough past legal professionalism that has left the company from the get go to straighten out this entire mess but my guess seems to lean towards our patents being too close to end of life.
We have talked about HDC collaboration, I sincerely believe we do not have collaboration ability to follow through or worth a corporation being attracted enough to deal with HDC. Our Directors DO NOT appear to be seasoned enough within the technologies to carry the responsibilities as needed nor the consistency to hold any corporations interest let alone work elbow and elbow with anyone.
You figure what were the short comings of our license dealings with NeoGenomics Corporation? It wasn't all their (NEO) fault now was it. So we now hear from Quirk yet he didn't want to even approach NeoGenomic Corporation nor did Kevin Kowbel wish to...so innocent Vennwest, sure we believe that one just like we believe Quirk.
So we have what left? We have George who isn't about to trust anyone so the bottom line is how far can he carry the company before he pulls his shares and money in spite of everyone. This must be frying the heck out of Quirk.
Not 1 director or anyone involved in any shape or form be it lawsuit past from the get go to the end of time with HDC will ever work together they all make me sick to my stomach, year after year taking and never giving what a crying shame.
HDC has always seemed to be caught up in some type of circus that everyone except us damn shareholders are constantly squeezing and tearing down the company. How could our company ALWAYS BE AS SUCH? It makes me sometimes wonder if all these people are working together and changing shifts each month or year.
Well!........it appears (and I maybe wrong?) that since "Vennwest Global Technologies" filed cause: 28:1332 "Diversity" -"Breach of Fiduciary Duty" would that indicate the rest of the puzzle that may indicate that "Vennwest" may have been financing Quirk & Bears lawsuit?
I wonder when Kowbel is going to show up?
King...I will read the information tomorrow but my thoughts are as follows.
With Intel we have documentations of a long history involving several patents so expiring patents doesn't matter (in my mind) however, involving Google, Apple, or Microsoft how much documentations and communications have we had with them involving any type of infringement possibilities?
Now what are the chances involving a reasonable or should I say favorable outcome with Intel? Keep in mind the massive history, discussions with and documentations involving them.
Next ask when has HDC knocked on Apples door or perhaps Microsoft or Googles door referencing them using our patents. It would seem Intel might be forced to pay something in settling the past years but Microsoft may have never been notified. So we notify Microsoft that we believe they are infringing, so when we do that would seem to be time start of the clock and documentations for any future legal event. Has HDC notified them...perhaps, have we tried the have them collaborate with us? I doubt that since we haven't heard anything indicated that from HDC however, that would be some great news if George is able to get more exposure but does he really want to press that at this time.
Now what is a possible shame yet George could be working on this idea as follows and recall MBMoney addressing this. So it is great we have the Lawsuit against Intel but is that all we have? As MBMoney would say (I believe) door on some doors and try to drum up some business that George and Directors need to be knocking on doors too as Intel isn't the only game in town so how about trying to license our patents and technology to other players.
HDC website even years ago Barnhill stated our SVM patents are earth shattering but as I see it it was nothing but shareholder shattering. HDC now talks of SVM-RFE technologies yet no takers? Is George just sitting at home waiting on the entire world to knock on our door? If so that won't happen as our history pretty talks the truth. State of the art SVM-RFE and the same ole nothing.
It is clear we should have had someone licensing our technologies by now. Do I need to count the years or the past directors and CEO that delivered nothing but pain.
George has done well but still he should have had additional corporation paying us some type of revenue by now.