Actually, you raise a good point as it relates to where the case is held. I agree that it likely matters not whether it's Waco or Austin, particularly since Intel signified in its motion that it isn't seeking to replace Judge Albright. None of us care about the venue.
On the other hand, since all we have is hope, perhaps the change in date for the Markman Hearing from early June to April 29 is meaningful. I have no idea if it means anything at all, but hopefully it's a sign that the judge wants to get past the nonsense of 'venue change' and other meaningless stuff, and perhaps he gets to set the record straight that he isn't going to throw the case out. That's all shareholders can hope for at this point, since this HDC team has shown its true colors and otherwise doesn't give a you-know-what about shareholders. We will only get to realize the 'residual' benefits if HDC wins or achieves a settlement. This was all about a personal motive on the part of McGovern and company, and this HDC team is obviously an extremely rotten group whose motives were to a) stick it to Quirk and Kowbel, and b) position themselves for significant personal gain at the expense of shareholders.
Inasmuch as you state that HDC will simply lose (as it always has), I again point to hope. Fortunately, this infringement suit rests not with the self-serving, lying bunch at the helm, but with experienced and reputable attorneys who are pursuing this on contingency. Attorney Robinson sure looks like he has the credentials that we need to move this forward but, of course, who knows.
As I've posted on multiple occasions, this HDC team has deliberately failed to monetize the intellectual property, but at the same time has purposefully used language in filings to suggest that it also intended to partner with other companies. A flat out lie. Coupled with the silent 'back-dating' of the Articles which included Series D shares (thereby allowing our Chairman to grab preferred shares with 10-1 voting rights), the god-awful excuse for an annual meeting that HDC clearly didn't want to conduct, the issuance of shares to insiders as the first order of business post-annual meeting, the fact that Zhang wasn't included in the issuance of those shares (meaning he isn't involved, although HDC pretends he is), the fact that HDC didn't inform shareholders appropriately before the annual meeting about its selection of the auditors, the fact that HDC's attorneys sent a letter that they would sue Quirk and company for pursuing essentially frivolous complaints, but clearly didn't pull the trigger when they didn't budge...........the list goes on.
In other words, I have no legitimate argument against anyone who posts, whether positive or negative, about HDC or its chances for survival. Yet, part of me would love to see what happens if the judge dismisses the suit, or if HDC ultimately loses. Perhaps we'll then get to see how the smug HDC directors then respond, particularly since Quirk, who couldn't run a lollipop stand, is already nipping at their heels and obviously out-maneuvered McGovern. With all the agony that so many of us long-term investors have endured for the past 15-20 years, perhaps that would be more fun than getting a few bucks out of a bad investment.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
