Member Info for Intrusivethought

Absolutely. Indeed, the planned IPO was abandoned altogether.

Also, Nanosys do not own all of their patent portfolio. Rather, they themselves are the exclusive licensees of a significant number of the the patents they hold.

Then they're probably not supplying Samsung at this point in time. If they are then they will not be receiving any IP related premium. In any case we don not know what their revenue, profit etc is.

Hand in glove.

Yes they did. Transferred to them by Samsung with a view to becoming a second supplier of the anticipated vast future CFQD requirement (assuming Nanosys are not already supplying Samsung). In 2019 Samsung Display announced the end of LCD production, switching instead to a focus entirely on QD-OLED display production. Shortly afterwards Nanosys announced a multi million dollar expansion of their QD production facility, increasing production capacity of HEAVY METAL FREE QDs to more than 50 tons annually (that is enough for 50 million 65 inch QLED LCD TVs!). Coincidence?

Indeed, we still do not know where LG are getting their CFQDs from. I wonder.

Notice also, that over the past 12 months or so Nanosys have dropped all mention of 'Heavy Metal Free' from their press releases, when previously they were enthusiastically communicating such.

https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-ded-1_19-cv-01307

U.S. Patent No. 7,105,051. Samsung was also named as a defendant in the case since it claims to licence Nanosys' IP. Perhaps this dispute was settled in part because Samsung would otherwise have had to reveal that it is not using Nanosys' IP to produce quantum dots, or commit perjury by maintaining the pretence that it is.

I have no knowledge of the size of the potential claim made nor the settlement figure.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/15916320/nncrystal-us-corporation-v-nanosys-inc/?page=2

It appears that the above dispute has now been resolved pre-trial.

Texas plant has nothing to do with QDs. This spurious claim has been stated a number of times before, no idea where it has come from.

Indeed.

Location Wales?

Their request re MCC will be denied. N's rebuttal is solid.

https://www.docketbird.com/court-documents/Nanoco-Technologies-Ltd-v-Samsung-Electronics-Co-Ltd-et-al/SUR-REPLY-to-Reply-to-Response-to-Motion-re-133-MOTION-for-Reconsideration-re-84-Memorandum-Opinion-CORRECTED-filed-by-Nanoco-Technologies-Ltd/txed-2:2020-cv-00038-00212

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-11065051/STOCKS-WATCH-Decision-time-looms-M-C-Saatchi-investors.html

This is brilliant. Thoroughly entertaining.

Go look for it. Good boy.

Have to disagree. A GLOBAL settlement of $1bn is not unrealistic at all.

Once again absent the term "heavy-metal free".

https://www.displaydaily.com/article/press-releases/quantum-dot-and-microled-pioneer-nanosys-secures-over-50-million-in-growth-capital-financing

'industry-leading consumer electronics brands have shipped more than 60 million devices in over 850 unique products from tablets to monitors and TVs with Nanosys’ proprietary quantum dot technology'

Total and utter bullsh*t. If true, they would not require round after round of additional funding. Give us some profit figures Nanosys?!

He did Feeks. You are correct.