Interesting interpretation. I keep going back to the issue of patent suppression, which seems a slam dunk in this case, at least ethically. This is, I believe, the potential personal threat hanging over the heads of the former Board of Schmucks, in their varying iterations since 2004. Has there been word one from any of the former talkative officers since receivership? That we are almost five months since receivership and have had no information from the receiver's May report to the court is most disappointing. OTOH, the court events due in the next several months will be high drama indeed.
