SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Microcap & Penny StocksDecision Diagnostics Corp (OTC: DECN)


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: NAG1 who wrote (209)5/2/2016 9:42:58 AM
From: thomas a. burke
   of 267
 
Neal...yes, I was referring to the Pacer document that was pasted on the other thread. It noted that multiple cases had been settled and I have to believe that these were the DECN cases. There are much smarter people than me following this and they all seem to think that the CA cases have been settled with the terms most likely sealed. That being said, I expected a big jump at the open but it appears NITE and CDEL continue to work overtime to hold it back. Eventually, they will fail.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: thomas a. burke who wrote (210)5/2/2016 3:12:42 PM
From: thomas a. burke
   of 267
 
After killing what appeared to be a good opening, it appears NITE & CDEL will walk it down into the close...again. I really hope DECN comes out with blockbuster news of contracts, settlement numbers or a buyout soon. It would be even better if subject news were strategically released in relatively quick succession to inflict maximum pain on various entities.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: thomas a. burke5/4/2016 10:50:13 AM
   of 267
 
It always amazes me how quickly and easily the MM's and/or shorts can suppress any buying pressure, particularly with stocks trading in the cesspool known as the OTC. I have to believe that very good things are in the works for DECN but until the terms of the most recent court victory or other tangible news is released, they will walk it back down to the mid-forties.

As I have said many times before, this is and will be the last pinkie/penny stock I will ever buy.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: thomas a. burke5/5/2016 4:14:40 PM
   of 267
 
Looks like Alpha Capital got another 6,455,771 Shares of Common Stock to short against. This would explain the vicious and consistent undercutting of the ask recently. I wonder how far down they will be able to take it?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: hdl who wrote (205)5/12/2016 9:42:17 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone
   of 267
 
J&J also agreed to pay a cash sum to Pharma Tech in consideration for Pharma Tech's agreement to vacate all claims made in its Anti-trust litigation.

This proposed settlement is entirely independent of Pharma Tech's claims of patent infringement filed recently against J&J that will be adjudicated in the Nevada Federal District court. Additional information related to this prospective settlement will be shared in upcoming communications.

PRESS RELEASEDecision Diagnostics Nears Positive Ending of Its California Patent and Trademark Infringement Litigation With Divisions of Johnson + Johnson

Published: May 12, 2016 9:20 a.m. ET





LOS ANGELES, CA, May 12, 2016 (Marketwired via COMTEX) -- LOS ANGELES, CA--(Marketwired - May 12, 2016) - Decision Diagnostics Corp. (otc pink:DECN), the manufacturer, quality plan administrator and the exclusive worldwide sales, service and regulatory processes agent for GenStrip™ 50 and the GenUltimate!™ glucose test strips, both designed to work with the market leading Johnson & Johnson's ("J&J") LifeScan OneTouch Ultra family of glucose testing meters, and the in-development GenSure!™ and GenChoice!™ glucose test strips targeted to the U.S. and/or developing world markets, today reports two consequential updates in its nearly five year legal battle with two divisions of pharmaceutical industry giant Johnson + Johnson, who in September 2011 began a series of lawsuits based on false, and as ultimately demonstrated, frivolous legal allegations of patent and trademark infringement.

On January 6, 2016 the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed with the three Appeals Court justices upholding the USPTO court's rejection of the foundational J&J patent that formed the basis for allegations of infringement filed and prosecuted against Pharma Tech. The Federal Circuit's ruling was issued via a Rule 36 decision. That ruling effectively and finally terminated the validity of any J&J patentability claims to their U.S. Patent Number 7,250,105 ('105). In an obvious attempt to insincerely extend the now porous umbrella of protection for the '105 patent, J&J petitioned the court for a judicial rehearing or en banc review of the court's decision. The Federal Circuit Court announced on May 10, 2016 that the polling of its entire panel of judges resulted in a unanimous rejection of the J&J petition. The impact of this rejection renders any J&J claims of patentability to the '105 patent null and void.

Secondly, in early March 2016 the district court judge in the three cases still active in the San Francisco Federal court, ordered J&J and Pharma Tech to participate in mandatory mediation to resolve all patent and trademark infringement litigation filed by J&J against Pharm Tech Solutions. Those mediation sessions were held on April 26, 2016 and conducted by the Chief Magistrate of the Federal District Court. The mediation concluded with the parties agreeing in principle to terms that would dismiss all litigation by J&J against the company. J&J also agreed to pay a cash sum to Pharma Tech in consideration for Pharma Tech's agreement to vacate all claims made in its Anti-trust litigation. The company continues to discuss the content and tenets of a formal settlement agreement. This proposed settlement is entirely independent of Pharma Tech's claims of patent infringement filed recently against J&J that will be adjudicated in the Nevada Federal District court. Additional information related to this prospective settlement will be shared in upcoming communications.


–– ADVERTISEMENT ––



Forward-Looking Statements: This release contains the Company's forward-looking statements which are based on management's current expectations and assumptions as of April 14, 2016, regarding the Company's business and performance, its prospects, current factors, the economy and other future conditions and forecasts of future events, circumstances and results.

CONTACT INFORMATION Decision Diagnostics Corp. Keith Berman (805) 446-2973 info@decisiondiagnostics.com www.decisiondiagnostics.com www.pharmatechdirect.com

? 2016 Marketwire L.P. All rights reserved.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: NAG1 who wrote (209)5/18/2016 8:05:38 AM
From: thomas a. burke
   of 267
 
Neal...a back of the napkin exercise here. Let's just assume after conversion of the preferred shares, we have an O/S of 100M. Say the "healthy amount" that J&J paid to DECN was $100M, which includes the bond with possible treble damages. That leaves us with a cash value of $1.00 per share.

Based on the following statement taken from the latest financial release regarding production and lost revenues, it is safe to assume first qtr revenues would have exceeded $400,000. It is also safe to assume they have capacity to generate quarterly revenues of $12M. Throw a 20% margin on there and you could have close to $10M in income per year...which could grow exponentially. Slap a forward P/E of 20 on there and you have a stock that should be trading at a bare minimum of $3.00 per share. I suspect it will be worth much more than that in 1 year. Of course, the company must now execute and sell the product, which I think they will do.

This problem began to clear up in late March 2016, and with the advent of adding the GenUltimate! product from Korea, shortages have been alleviated. The company’s capacity for Genstrip 50 and GenUltimate! production is now 500,000 packages per month (50 strips per package). Lack of inventory to service sales orders is estimated to have lowered sales by $250,000 or more in 1Q 2016.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: hdl who wrote (205)5/18/2016 8:27:23 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone
   of 267
 
HDL

Can you confirm? Thank you.

Formal mandates aren't issued for PATO cases. We will not see a mandate appearing on PACER.

Rule 41. Mandate: Contents; Issuance and Effective Date; Stay
(a) Contents. Unless the court directs that a formal mandate issue, the mandate consists of a certified copy of the judgment, a copy of the court's opinion, if any, and any direction about costs.
law.cornell.edu

Procedure..

I.OFFICE PROCEDURE FOLLOWING DECISION BY THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has heard and decided the appeal, the Clerk of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit forwards to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office a certified copy of the court’s decision. This certified copy is known as the “mandate.” The mandate is entered in the file of the application, reexamination or interference which was the subject of the appeal. The date the mandate was issued by the Federal Circuit marks the conclusion of the appeal, i.e., the termination of proceedings as that term is used in 35 U.S.C. 120. See 37 CFR 1.197.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s opinion may or may not be precedential. Whether or not the opinion is precedential, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will not give the public access to the administrative record of an involved application unless it is otherwise available to the public under 37 CFR 1.11. However, since the court record in a 35 U.S.C. 141 appeal generally includes a copy of at least part of the application, the application may be inspected at the Federal Circuit. In re Mosher, 248 F.2d 956, 115 USPQ 140 (CCPA 1957).

uspto.gov

from :

hugh_jackoman Tuesday, 05/17/16 10:29:34 PM
Re: None
Post # of 31247

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: thomas a. burke who wrote (215)5/18/2016 2:41:00 PM
From: NAG1
   of 267
 
Thomas,

The numbers can be very interesting as you said if
1)they have gotten a nice settlement from J&J
2)they can sell their strips at a nice margins

If the above is correct, your $3 guesstimate could be very low. If they can't perform as expected, then maybe they can reach a buck a share.

Just got a chance to look at todays trading and it looks like the longer traders have to wait for significant news, the more profit taking that will occur. I picked up some trading shares last week. I will wait and see if the share price drops further to see if I should pick up some more.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: NAG1 who wrote (217)5/19/2016 5:04:59 PM
From: thomas a. burke
   of 267
 
Neal....looks like another wasted day here. It is trading as if there was absolutely no financial benefit awarded to DECN from J&J. I guess if you are homeless, $10 could be considered "healthy". Oh well, I am also considering flipping a portion of my shares. Over the last 7 or 8 years, the flippers are the only ones who have made money here. Kudos to the flippers!!!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: thomas a. burke5/25/2016 4:05:42 PM
   of 267
 
Gotta wonder who dumped 355,000 shares this afternoon? Wonder if it was the same person that dumped 175,000 shares yesterday. We should be back in the mid twenties by next week. Gotta love pennyland.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10