InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 421
Posts 30130
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/13/2017

Re: art35 post# 4712

Saturday, 04/28/2018 5:10:54 PM

Saturday, April 28, 2018 5:10:54 PM

Post# of 42618
I don't think anyone cares that much about the compensation for what was lost during Christopher's ineptness. The enchilada is the rights to the patent moving forward imo

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Court grant the following relief against Defendant iSee Automation, Inc.:
1. A judgment declaring that BRK owns the Patent and the Subject Technology pursuant to the Patent Assignment Agreement;
2. A judgment declaring that BRK owns BRK’s Mark, which that is the subject of and described in the Trademark Application, pursuant to the Patent Assignment Agreement and ordering iSee to formally transfer ownership of BRK’s Mark to BRK with the United States Patent and Trademark Office;
3. A judgment declaring that BRK entitled to revenues from contracts associated with the Helmet System Patent and Subject Technology and the use of BRK’s Mark, including such contracts entered into between iSee and Rogers Media, pursuant to the Revenue Assignment Agreement;
4. A judgment for damages caused to BRK by iSee’s breaches of the Patent Assignment Agreement and Revenue Assignment Agreement, in an amount to be proven at trial.
DATED this 13th day of November, 2017.