Replies to post #63198 on Options Wonderland

[nlightn]

PMTI...in my opinion it is not topping.

i do see a potential retrace as this one is being shorted. but if more and more positive news starts to come from the company then the shorts are toast.

Institutional ownership of PMTI is 59%. 13.35% held by Insiders. Short Statistics

Shares Short (as of Nov 30, 2010)3: 910.41K
Short Ratio (as of Nov 30, 2010)3: 12.30
Short % of Float (as of Nov 30, 2010)3: 5.30%
Shares Short (prior month)3: 834.56K

if you watch the buying on this is is in slow accumulation mode. now that the anticipated news has come out regarding their product launch this one could move quickly into $15-$18 range.

granted the product release is *what* has been THE potential mover of the price. if the launch is successful then we have winner.

Pivot Points

R4 14.58
midpoint 14.35
R3 14.12
midpoint 13.89
R2 13.66
midpoint 13.53
R1 13.39
midpoint 13.30
PP 13.20
midpoint 13.07
S1 12.93
midpoint 12.84
S2 12.74
midpoint 12.51
S3 12.28
midpoint 12.05
S4

[nlightn]

3XBuBa...this is the other revenue producing potential for PMTI...

it's obvious if they win this it's parabolic time.

Palomar Reopens Infringement Lawsuit Against Candela and Syneron
January 6, 2010

Citing recent victories at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office, Palomar Medical Technologies resumes its legal fight against Candela and Syneron, aiming for its day in court this year.


Palomar Medical Technologies Inc. (NSDQ:PMTI) has a wedding present for Candela Corp. (NSDQ:CLZR) and Syneron Inc. (NSDQ:ELOS): Another patent infringement lawsuit.

The Burlington, Mass.-based cosmetic laser device maker said it's resuming its patent infringement lawsuit against newly united Candela and Syneron, which officially closed their merger on Tuesday.

Palomar said it received permission from the court to re-file its infringement lawsuit over a "Hair Removal Using Optical Pulses" patent. The courts decision follows a pair of decisions in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office. Both entities upheld the bulk of device maker's patents as "novel and inventive" over its competitors'. Palomar filed the original lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts.

Palomar first made its intentions to re-start the case clear in a July 30, 2009, earnings release, in which it revealed that it was filing a motion to restart the case.

In a prepared release, Patricia Davis, Palomar's general counsel, said the next step was to set a day in court, which she hoped would come some time in the next calendar year.

"Our case against Candela is very far along and we will request a trial date as soon as possible," Davis said.

The case dates back to a pair of patents Palomar licensed from Mass. General Hospital back in 1995 for light-based hair removal. Palomar says Candela and Syneron willfully copied the company's technology, CEO Joseph Caruso said in a statement.

"After establishing light-based hair removal as a viable treatment option, many competitors began to use our technology. Several properly took licenses while others opted not to at their own risk. Unauthorized taking of technology is what the patent system is designed to prevent. We intend to continue our aggressive patent enforcement strategy both to protect our own investment in research and market development as well as the investment of our licensees."

http://www.massdevice.com/news/palomar-reopens-infringement-lawsuit-against-candela-and-syneron