Thanks for the reply. I don't really know how much is going on in the realm of negotiating settlements if they are hung up on the whether or not there should be a "stay" in relation to the Cantrell testimony. The whole reason the alleged infringers want to push ahead with the Cantrell testimony is because they believe they will have some sort of grounds to have GreenShifts patents ruled void/invalid as a result of the testimony. GreenShift obviously wants a stay because they are worried that they may have a case in these regards. If this is the case I don't really see the alleged infringers just jumping on board and discussing settlements when they still believe they have a good shot to have Green Shifts patents invalidated.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
