Member Info for Bagpuss67

The expeet witness died. Even Tesla are not that ruthless

I assume Cap xx woud need to RNS a loss at the Alice order? No new Pacer filings yet and SP stable so maybe the Judge hasn't yet issued any order yet.

What has happened?

That's just some stuff about the damages model

Actually. I think the point is the actions are not about the same patents it appears

The Alice test is about whether the IP was even capable of being patented in the first place though isn't it. Not about jurisdictions?

I can see that and can see the judge is hearing it. Just seems ridiculous that you can sue in the basis that you have a patent and at the same time approach the court and say the patent you are suing on is invalid.

Sorry if this has been covered but how do Telsa in the on hand assert that Cap xx has infringed its patent rights but on the other hand bring an Alice defence

Feels like at last the tide is turning here SP wise. Still a lot of potential news before the end of the year which could see this back up to the heady highs of 20p.... things have been dire but the cupboard surely isn't entirely bare.. :)

It's just accounting technicalities the only cash that will me paid is the settlement.

The CD free QD IP has been tested to be robust so can't just use a multiple for value. That IP must have some some standalone value although allowing Samsung to use it Royalty free ha probably crushed a huge amount of what ever that value was..

9p...but I was down a few hundred k from past trades in nano

He/she said nearly notifiable

I have 285k. The main man/woman is mapocho on advfn. Sounds like c 10m

Surely must be worldwide... it would be a terrible loss of leverage and very poor negotiation if it was anything but that

Morning and congratulations all. Is the poster Nigwit still here? Is he Gigawitt..interested in their take on developments..

That's odd. I only see a 13 July purchase of 5million at 34.2p which for which the disclosure seems to be in the same format as the one that is being debated.
I think this was take at the time to be a purchase by HT and this,
together which together with the purchase by Tariq Hamoodi got the market fired up.. Its early and I'm rushing so could have misread.

I agree now. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. I was confused by this in the RNS

Nanoco (LSE: NANO), a world leader in the development and manufacture of cadmium-free quantum dots and other specific nanomaterials emanating from our technology platform, has been notified of the following transactions by a PDMR.

Whereas it is in fact a PCA of the PDMA.

And we know LOAM trade in an out all the time..

Keep up the good work all..

Thanks. So that means that LOAM are a PDMR?

Although you can have a coporate "person" I didn't think a shareholder would be a PDMR.. But I accept I could have been mistaken on that.

The PDMR transactions register contains data about persons discharging managerial responsibilities and the transactions that they and persons closely associated with them have performed in shares and debt instruments issued by the issuer and other related financial instruments.

Wheras Mr Tulchan does appear to fit the description of a PDMR

Why it's not him.. I assume you mean its not him selling. If that's thats what you mean, Im just asking why you say that?