InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 50
Posts 9090
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/13/2007

Re: jimtash post# 15852

Wednesday, 03/13/2013 3:30:31 PM

Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:30:31 PM

Post# of 30046
One that is 4 years old. One that has been stamped with final rejection, and nobody knows when another ruling will be made or who even the patent is assigned to...then yes.

The Genway stuff if the least of Radient's concerns for the patent IMO. It simply appears there was a misunderstanding to the dates of something that was on a website for that. As Gold has pointed out, Genway never sold the kits in any significant amount and it hasn't been on their website for awhile. IMO the Genway stuff isn't the real problem for that patent. It's Narveen Junda and the work those guys did. That was a big reason for rejection. Yes Radient did reply but it wasn't like XYZ info was wrong. That one isn't cut and dried IMO. Good luck either way but this "newest" patent application which is 4 years old doesn't have anything to do with some type of new Onko-Sur/Provista kit or whatever some may think or wish. If Radient does work with Provista, then good but I'm not seeing anything from that patent info that leads me to believe that. JMHO as always. GL
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.