Gartner doesn't work for Provista, IMO.
The only place there is a reference to Gartner still holding a position at Provista is a LinkedIn page. We've proven several times that LinkedIn is not 100% accurate. And what is an Executive VP anyway? Gartner is not listed on any of Provista's recent filings.
If Gartner didn't get the IP by paying $6000 to Radient, he got it from Provista when he resigned from Provista and created GCDx. However he got the IP, he has it now, and silly or not, Gartner is moving forward with his plans to sell DR-70 through GCDx.
Starting GCDx didn't cost much money. I haven't seen any evidence that GCDx has spent much money on anything. Yet. Submitting a 510(k) would be a significant expense. I will be surprised if/when GCDx gets the money for that.
Trademarks don't matter. Trademarks only stop someone else from using that name or picture or slogan. Who cares what he calls it or why he abandoned the first name (it was because they rejected the application, wolfie, you posted the link yourself in the past). Bottom line, the Trademark for Gartner's test is the least significant thing here. The patent is all that matters. Without a patent, Radient has no assets and can never rise from the ashes, IMO.
AI
