Replies to post #51209 on QSGI, Inc.(fka QSGI)

[Spymaster3]

I assume you are responding to my post 43687 where a reader would see that there is no lawsuit and that I clearly covered that QSGI and their attorney are looking as to whether they will try and advance a lawsuit. I may add that QSGI has been saying this since 2007.

Fact: My posts was made in response to various claims on the MB that there was (i) an active lawsuit with IBM, (ii) talk about such was about to return substantial awards or settlement amounts to IBM and (iii) talk that IBM was about to buy QSGI versus risk a lawsuit judgment or offer a large settlement. Also people were asking when the trial date was and claiming companies like IBM will wait until the day a trail starts and them offer a big settlement. My post was to clarify those matters and dispel the grossly misleading data being presented.

Fact: I covered possible litigation or settlement in my posts.

Fact: The DS clearly lays out the fact the attorney was just approved at the end of 2010, that he believed the statute of limitations expired in days from them and that IBM had extended them a four month tolling provision.

Fact: The was no IBM lawsuit when I posted that and there is no IBM lawsuit today (unless you a case number to show it exist)

Fact: To state the following is a fact is not true: "to say there is no IBM lawsuit is a premature"

Any discussion that one can place any meaning or substance to the why, whatfore, etc of any tolling agreement beyond IBM extended them the time to review the matter speculation and not fact.

BTW, lets not forget the attorney here has no apparent Anti-trust experience and the agreement had him utilizing other experts to assist in determining whether to pursue a lawsuit, etc and that the Court Order approving him barred any expenditures of this nature without specific approval from the court. I think I got that correct but one can go back and see the initial request for approval of the attorney and the court order approving him.

Then one should also read the link to my IBM post (it's in my stickied post) and see the full discussion and the context.