Calypso has sued Daic for interferences and breach of the 2008 agreement. Daic has counter-sued Calypso for default of the 2008 agreement. Default and breach are not the same thing. If Daic wins, he gets the patents as they were collateral defined under the default terms of the agreement. If Calypso wins, then the 2008 agreement would be in place with NO default and any damages sustained by Calypso would be deducted from monies owed on the 2008 agreement. If damages exceed $25M +/-, Daic/Williamson would owe Calypso money.
There is a third option, that the judge rules BOTH parties breached the agreement and awards both parties appropriate damages for their respective breaches but does not rule a "default" occurred. A default and a Breach are not (necessarily) the same thing. I don't see this occurring.
Clear as mud...but that is the case as I read it.
According to the filings, it has been Williamson who has been crying about the previous Judgment, not Calypso, and that is why Markle has said to the judge that the case should be in the 151st district then per the rules of the court. (I admit I haven't read the exhibits of the last filing)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
