How do any of us really know whether or not Fish was the main contributor to the MMP patents? Just because a few people here seem to think that he was, where has it been proven to be true?
What we do know (or at least I think we know) is that Fish sold his patents to Faulk (Nanotronics) and had Faulk convinced that he (Fish) was sole inventory. Nanotronics in turn sold the patents to PTSC. In all of the past filings I could not find any reference to another inventor (Moore). It appears that PTSC represented to shareholders that they were the sole owners of the MMP patents.
Yet, a simple search at the patent office clearly shows Moore as co-inventor from the beginning. Didn't PTSC's then BoD/Management investigate ownership before the Nanotronics deal?
One bad decision after another including the most recent decision on the settlement agreement. What about all of PTSC's allegations in the 1st amended complaint? How have they been addressed (or not) in the settlement agreement?
As Ease and others have suggested (incl me) perhaps a letter to the SEC in light of the settlement agreement will be enough to open an investigation.
