Replies to post #6135 on Rock Creek Pharmaceuticals Inc. (fka RCPIQ)

[MineAllMine]

Thanks.

[Billfish62]

I have been with STSI a long time and don't understand the cloak and dagger of late. This is very frustrating.

[skiguy28]

It had been my understanding after speaking with people familiar with these matters last week as well as based on experience that any material event triggers that an 8K be filed. Your post seems to say that they could file a material event in the next 10-Q. If that is the case, then you will know for sure by the next 10-Q if a material event took place with no ifs ands or buts. That being said, given STSI's past of releasing press releases on everything possible, I cannot imagine how they would not have put something out by now at the very least giving an update on the situation. My guess (pure guess) is that Star agreed not to pursue Reynolds any more in court and Reynolds agreed to drop their claim to the $35 million they wanted for legal fees. STSI may have found that Reynolds had a solid case for that money and that is money STSI does not have. The key to keep in mind is that while the patents were valid, Reynolds was found to have never infringed upon them. It is hard to get a lot of money from someone in a patent infringement case if they never infringed.

[north40000]

TFM----check my memory, I recall that Perito's past history involved being a partner in PaulHastings, a well-known international law firm, being personally more than familiar with complex civil litigation including securities law. You and I saw how he handled various aspects of PPHM related matters at the annual shareholders meeting this past December.