Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[PatentGuy1]

I should think that the Court would want to know why, if John Kang, indeed, is independent of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc., which he is, then why did Liquidmetal Technologies retain all of John Kang's cronies for so long

I disagree. IMO, the court will probably never know that "Kang's cronies" were retained after Kang's relationship was terminated. The court doesn't just go out and look for facts. Instead, the facts are presented to the court. I can't see how this issue would be pertinent to LQMT's case against Kang, and therefore, LQMT will probably not bring it up. Similarly, I don't see this issue as being a defense for Kang. Even if it does come to light, IMO, the court will probably just say that the issue is not pertinent to alleged wrong doing and is inadmissible.